On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
> > It might help if you presented more specific scenarios that you're
> concerned about.
>
> I already did. To summarize:
>
> - We already have different implementations of the compositor in browsers
> - Scrolling (one gainer) is implemented differently in browsers
>
I don't know what you mean by "gainer" here.
Sure, scrolling and compositing work differently in different browsers, but
I don't see how that makes it dangerous to allow authors to signal an
intent to scroll a particular element. Implementations can take advantage
of that signal in different ways, or just ignore it if it doesn't matter to
them.
- teaching authors browser specifics that they rely on later ->
> improvements on compositor and heuristics get harder
>
Unlike translateZ(1px) hacks, will-animate is not a browser-specific hack.
I'm not sure how your comment applies to will-animate.
- performance benefits are different depending on the platform may lead to
> things like * { will-animate: all; }
>
I already explained that we'll just start ignoring will-animate if a page
applies it to too many elements.
>
> - buffered rendering for animated transforms and filters might not be true
> for all time (see NVPath)
>
That's absolutely fine. If some implementations evolve to the point where
it's not helpful to know whether an element will be transformed, they can
just ignore "will-animate:transform".
You seem to think "will-animate:transform" mandates some particular
implementation strategy. It doesn't.
My personal guess is that implementations will work on the last point more
> in the next 2-3 years. Creating a stacking context would harm more at that
> time.
>
What's the harm of creating a stacking context? It's very cheap in Gecko.
These concerns still seem vague to me. I'd like to hear a much more
concrete example of how something could go wrong.
Rob
--
Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp
waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 09:53:25 UTC