- From: Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 20:52:38 +0200
- To: Adam Klein <adamk@chromium.org>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, www-dom@w3.org, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On 02/17/2012 08:46 PM, Adam Klein wrote: > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Olli Pettay<Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi> wrote: >> On 02/17/2012 04:41 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> >>> The idea still is that HTML is responsible for invoking the callbacks >>> and emptying the MutationRecord queues, right? Have you thought about >>> what HTML has to say yet Adam? >>> >> >> HTML spec should probably define what a microtask means >> and then mutation observer spec should just use that mechanism. >> Microtask ends when the outermost script execution of >> innermost task ends, or if there is no script execution, when >> the innermost task ends. > > The other thing required is an addition to > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#processing-model-2 > (between steps 3& 4, probably) to deliver MutationRecords at the end > of every task (if there's anything there). This handles cases, such as > editing, where DOM is mutated without any script execution. That is what I meant with "if there is no script execution, when the innermost task ends." :) > > - Adam
Received on Friday, 17 February 2012 18:53:53 UTC