- From: Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:03:30 +0200
- To: Travis Leithead <travil@microsoft.com>
- CC: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>, "Jonas Sicking (jonas@sicking.cc)" <jonas@sicking.cc>
Hi Travis, Few comments about NodeWatch * When using selectors that do not imply document structural relationships (e.g., “div”) movements of the elements within the document will not trigger callbacks. If this scenario is needed, supply a selector that enforces a particular document structure (e.g., “div>div”) How would you handle for example the case where div elements under another div are re-ordered. Does minimumFrequency==0 mean same as with setTimeout(foo, 0) or does it mean "execute as soon as possible after mutation"? I think the latter one might be desirable in some (many?) cases. How to handle namespaced elements? namespaced attributes? In general I like the NodeWatch approach. Should be implementable in JS right now (without some optimizations which browser engines can do). But it needs some tweaking still. -Olli On 1/27/10 2:38 AM, Travis Leithead wrote: > Based on the last round of feedback [1], I've updated the proposal > for "Selector-based mutation events" (which I keep calling "fast > mutation events" for some reason...). Doug, I'm sure you're hard at > work on a better acronym... > > In this edition, I expanded the background sections and enumerated > many of the usage scenarios, relying heavily on previous email > threads and discussions to summarize points. For completeness I also > added Jonas' original proposal so that the two could be compared > side-by-side. The proposals are very different--each has pros and > cons, and I hope that through constructive discussions we can arrive > at a unified proposal that will work for most (or all) scenarios. > > So, please go read it and let me know what you think: > http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/Selector-based_Mutation_Events_v2_%28needs_a_better_name%29 > > Doug, consider this the kick-off for W3C-ifying this proposal. > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2009OctDec/0140.html > >
Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2010 19:04:17 UTC