Re: [css-display]? Compositing, expensive things, and laziness

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:19 PM, François REMY
<francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote:
>> Again, read earlier in the thread.  This exact question was raised by
>> roc, and Ali answered him. I'm not as well qualified to answer this.
>
> I don't think our proposal have much in common, except the fact both use
> rAF. Roc's proposal was about using the normal rAF to trigger the animation
> in a delayed fashion (which does not work because you just delayed the
> problem). That's not what I'm proposing.
>
> Maybe I didn't express my idea well, but I propose to use
>
>    (1) the "display-optionality: optional" declaration to indicate the
> rendering of the element is facultative.
>    (2) an element-tied rAF which only fires when an element has been painted
> and is ready for his next frame.

Okay, so you're just proposing a different name for the current
proposed "optionalElementRendered" event, more or less.

This lacks the "optionalElementNonRendered" case, and has the "fails
in older browsers" behavior that roc wants to avoid.

~TJ

Received on Friday, 21 June 2013 20:51:17 UTC