- From: Sjoerd Visscher <sjoerd@w3future.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 21:49:33 +0200
Dean Edwards wrote: > Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: > >> To be honest, the think the idea of "drawing transactions" is better. >> Here are the reasons: >> >> #1: It makes it so, if the develop wants it, that they can have things >> that are "drawn" show up immediately. (I.e., they aren't forced to >> use "double buffering" [or whatever].) >> >> #2: It makes it so you could have "long lasting" scripts execute. >> >> #3: It makes it so Java and C++ interfacing will work the same. (I.e., >> you don't have to give C++ and Java an API to effectively do >> "drawing transactions" without also giving this API to JavaScript.) >> >> So +1 for "drawing transactions" :-) >> > > +1 > > I'd hate to see them implied by script blocks though. That way lies > madness. ;-) > > -dean > > I'm just describing how it is currently implemented in Firefox. And how DHTML rendering has been implemented for years. I don't think that will change, and so canvas has to play with the same rules. -- Sjoerd Visscher http://w3future.com/weblog/
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2005 12:49:33 UTC