- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 10:45:42 -0700
- To: Justin Novosad <junov@google.com>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>, Nils Dagsson Moskopp <nils@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Justin Novosad <junov@google.com> wrote: > On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> > wrote: > > > On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Justin Novosad <junov@google.com> > wrote: > > > >> My point is, we need a proper litmus test for the "just do it in script" > >> argument because, let's be honnest, a lot of new features being added to > >> the Web platform could be scripted efficiently, and that does not > >> necessarily make them bad features. > >> > > > > Which ones? > > > > The examples I had in mind when I wrote that were Path2D Crossing the JS boundary is still an issue so implementing this in pure JS would be too slow. Path2D is only there to minimize DOM calls. > and HitRegions. I agree that most of hit regions can be implemented using JS. The reason for hit regions is a11y and people felt a feature that just does accessibility, will end up unused or unimplemented.
Received on Monday, 2 June 2014 17:46:07 UTC