On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Julien Wajsberg wrote:
> While I agree on all you're saying, it has one inconvenient: we'll
> likely have criticism for giving preference to our apps over third-party
> apps. For someone external to the project, it's similar to what Apple is
> doing with Webkit HW a
I think we should do 2. That is what we did for the Promise API. I
have no problem with exposing more APIs only internally before we
expose it to the full web, as long as we keep working towards exposing
it to the full web which seems like the case here.
/ Jonas
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Be
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Benoit Girard wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
>
>> Yes, that's fair. In the world of DOM APIs, we sometimes do this for
>> other reasons though, either because of time pressure to ship, or because
>> we're not sure if a given API is a
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> Yes, that's fair. In the world of DOM APIs, we sometimes do this for
> other reasons though, either because of time pressure to ship, or because
> we're not sure if a given API is a good idea and we want to have a sandbox
> where a subset of
On 12/4/2013, 11:56 AM, Julien Wajsberg wrote:
Le 04/12/2013 17:26, Ehsan Akhgari a écrit :
On 12/3/2013, 6:02 PM, Benoit Girard wrote:
At this point we're leaning towards exposing it to all of b2g however I
don't expect this property to be widely used outside of gaia. We have 3
options, (1) Wa
Le 04/12/2013 17:26, Ehsan Akhgari a écrit :
> On 12/3/2013, 6:02 PM, Benoit Girard wrote:
>> At this point we're leaning towards exposing it to all of b2g however I
>> don't expect this property to be widely used outside of gaia. We have 3
>> options, (1) Wait until the spec is ready and miss out
On 12/3/2013, 6:02 PM, Benoit Girard wrote:
At this point we're leaning towards exposing it to all of b2g however I
don't expect this property to be widely used outside of gaia. We have 3
options, (1) Wait until the spec is ready and miss out on important
performance improvements (2) Expose it to
On 03/12/13 23:28, Kevin Grandon wrote:
Are we not going to prefix it with -moz-?
We're not doing this anymore, see
https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebAPI/ExposureGuidelines
___
dev-b2g mailing list
dev-b2g@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listin
At this point we're leaning towards exposing it to all of b2g however I
don't expect this property to be widely used outside of gaia. We have 3
options, (1) Wait until the spec is ready and miss out on important
performance improvements (2) Expose it to subset of B2G which will gain
preferential tr
I want to avoid going in to much detail about will-animate itself since I
don't want to maintain and repeat the discussion in two forums. However
it's worth noting that will-animate is much more then an alias for
'translateZ()'. translateZ will force us to optimize the page to 3d
transform the elem
On 12/3/2013, 4:25 PM, Benoit Girard wrote:
In bug 940842 I started investigating adding a new CSS property
'will-animate' to let authors give better descriptions of their intents
instead of relying on our complicated, and unpredictable, internal
heuristics. The better the platform can understand
I don't have much to add except this seems like much better syntax than what we
are forced to do in Chrome for layer promotion (adding -webkit-transform:
translateZ(0); for example).
As long as there is some path forward for the open web I'm happy with it. Are
we not going to prefix it with -mo
In bug 940842 I started investigating adding a new CSS property
'will-animate' to let authors give better descriptions of their intents
instead of relying on our complicated, and unpredictable, internal
heuristics. The better the platform can understand what the page is trying
to do, the better it
13 matches
Mail list logo
