- From: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 11:15:29 -0400
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, James Ross <w3c-20040125@james-ross.co.uk>
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org> wrote: > > I'd love to hear other ideas! > > Well, we have had some discussions in the past about introducing a > better event API: > > https://gist.github.com/annevk/5238964 > > Maybe the time has come... > I think there's a big opportunity to substantially improve scroll performance on the web in the relatively short term by doing something incremental. I.e. I'm pretty sure I can get major scroll-blocking libraries like Google Analytics to opt into the pattern proposed here in a relatively short timeframe. I'm much less sure I could get them to switch to a completely new event API in any sort of reasonable timeframe. What do you think about an incremental path? I don't see any fundamental reason that things need to change drastically. (I agree with Philip that if we add this it would need to become part > of whatwg/dom. That seems like a better place for any GitHub > discussion too.) > If we can get consensus on the basic approach, then I'd be happy to rework my proposal in the form of a pull-request and move all issue tracking to whatwg/dom. There's probably no point in doing that until we have an agreement on the basic API shape, right? > -- > https://annevankesteren.nl/ >
Received on Thursday, 9 July 2015 15:16:25 UTC