W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2014

Re: [whatwg] allow <link> in body + DOM position as a rendering hint

From: Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 10:17:47 -0800
Message-ID: <CAKRe7JECt37tkeuofK93R3ji2NsTogeoqY1F3zK3=5mzZLs2fg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Cc: Jeremy Keith <jeremy@adactio.com>, WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>, Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>
I've opened a bug to track this:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27304

On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> > Re, re-evaluation previous elements: note that UA *can*, just as it does
>> > today (modulo some error conditions), hold painting until it finds all
>> the
>> > stylesheets, regardless of the <link> position in the document. So,
>> > assuming that's the default behavior, allowing <link> in body doesn't
>> > change anything short of reflecting what developers are already doing.
>> That
>> > said, the UA *could* use the position of the <link> element in the body
>> as
>> > a hint to optimize how it renders -- the exact logic here is deferred to
>> > the UA... Similarly, assuming UA follows the render-optimization
>> heuristic,
>> > the developers *can* optimize the content of the positioned stylesheets
>> to
>> > minimize reflows, etc.
>>
>> I talked more with a rendering & layout expert in our team, and he
>> pointed out that we may need to add a new attribute to trigger this
>> behavior since many existing websites have link elements to load
>> stylesheets that affect contents above it.  But that should be a relatively
>> simple & straightforward change to the proposal.
>
>
> Makes sense, Jason (IE) also mentioned that we might need some <meta>
> opt-in flag, or some such... That said, before we go there, I'd love to see
> if we can gather some data on potential impact of making this opt-in vs
> opt-out.
>
> ig
>
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2014 18:18:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:32 UTC