> On Feb 3, 2020, at 11:25 AM, Ken Russell <k...@google.com> wrote: > > The name "requestAnimationFrame" was chosen mainly to achieve parity with the > AnimationFrameProvider mixin, which now provides the same animation facility > to the main thread and dedicated workers: > https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/imagebitmap-and-animations.html#animation-frames > > <https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/imagebitmap-and-animations.html#animation-frames> > https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-video-requestanimationframe/3691 > <https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-video-requestanimationframe/3691> > > It offers a nice symmetry with other JavaScript-driven animations.
But the video.requestAnimationFrame behavior seems fundamentally different to window.requestAnimationFrame. It feels like it's conflating two different things. Simon > > -Ken > > > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 6:58 AM Philip Jägenstedt <foo...@chromium.org > <mailto:foo...@chromium.org>> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > Naming is hard as usual and was discussed on > https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/429 > <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/429>, where you've already > commented. > > Is there a pair of names that you think would work better here? > onFrameAvailable() would IMHO be quite unidiomatic, the web platform doesn't > have any other onFoo() methods, and what would the "cancel" variant be called? > > Can you file an issue in https://github.com/WICG/video-raf/issues > <https://github.com/WICG/video-raf/issues> if you see a good alternative? > > Also curious if +Eric Carlson <mailto:eric.carl...@apple.com> has any > feedback on this? > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 10:49 PM Simon Fraser <simon.fra...@apple.com > <mailto:simon.fra...@apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Jan 21, 2020, at 5:27 PM, Thomas Guilbert <tguilb...@google.com >> <mailto:tguilb...@google.com>> wrote: >> >> The idea was to reuse an API name that developers are already familiar with, >> in a similar context. The name is also being used in XRSession >> (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/XRSession/requestAnimationFrame >> >> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/XRSession/requestAnimationFrame>), >> and in OffscreenCanvas (or technically DedicatedWorkerGlobalScope). The >> AnimationFrameProvider mixin >> <https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/imagebitmap-and-animations.html#animationframeprovider> >> could also be updated so HTMLVideoElement can extend it. >> >> Yes, this isn't formally spec'ed out, but it will be. For now, they are >> added to the task queue and run like any other task. So, going off the spec >> you linked, I think this would be "5) Perform oldestTask's step" and not >> "10) Rendering: [...] 11. Foreach document run animation frame callbacks for >> that Document". > > I would expect something that's called "requestAnimationFrame" to only fire > in the "update the rendering" steps; requestAnimationFrame is a "before > rendering" callback. So firing a callback with the same name at other times > seems like it will lead to author confusion. > > The author's expectation should be that any content/style changes they make > inside a requestAnimationFrame callback will appear on-screen in the same > frame as other changes in the same event loop cycle, and that > requestAnimationFrame won't be called more often than is necessary to update > the screen at the appropriate frame rate. > > Simon > >> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 1:01 PM Simon Fraser <simon.fra...@apple.com >> <mailto:simon.fra...@apple.com>> wrote: >>> On Jan 21, 2020, at 12:37 PM, Thomas Guilbert <tguilb...@google.com >>> <mailto:tguilb...@google.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> I'm reaching out to see if webkit would like to weigh in on the following >>> proposal: >>> https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-video-requestanimationframe/3691 >>> <https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-video-requestanimationframe/3691> >>> The HTMLVideoElement.requestAnimationFrame() API allows web developers to >>> be notified when a video frame has been presented for composition, and >>> provides metadata for that frame. >>> If you want to try it out, a prototype is available in Chromium Dev, behind >>> the enable-experimental-web-platform-features flag. >> >> This is not official feedback, but I have some issues with the proposal. >> >> First, the name is confusing. It sounds like you're requesting a frame from >> the video, but it's really a "frame available" callback. Why not call it >> onFrameAvailable()? >> >> Second, its interaction with normal requestAnimationFrame() and the HTML >> event loop needs to be better defined. Where in in the >> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/webappapis.html#event-loop-processing-model >> >> <https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/webappapis.html#event-loop-processing-model> >> do these callbacks fire? >> >> Simon >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org <mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org> > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev > <https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev> > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org <mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org> > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev > <https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev>
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
