Skip to content

[scroll-animations] Mention design constraint of not blocking scrolling? #819

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
RByers opened this issue Dec 19, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

Comments

@RByers
Copy link
Contributor

RByers commented Dec 19, 2016

Depending on exactly how your interpret it, the avoiding cycles section implies that scrolling may need to block on JavaScript / layout.

For blink (and probably also at least Edge) that is a non-starter. Ensuring scrolling never blocks on the main thread has been our #1 scroll performance effort for several years, we're unwilling to allow that without an explicit scary-sounding opt-in API and a mitigation strategy (eg. "intervention" that applies on sites whose performance isn't good enough to permit a reasonable user experience on low end phones).

Is there agreement on this non-blocking design constraint for scroll animations? If so, perhaps it's worth mentioning in the introduction somewhere?

/cc @majido @flackr @shans

@birtles
Copy link
Contributor

birtles commented Dec 19, 2016

Should this be filed over at WICG where the spec currently lives?
https://github.com/WICG/scroll-animations/issues

@RByers
Copy link
Contributor Author

RByers commented Dec 20, 2016

Duh, yes - sorry, done. I just blindly used the "GitHub issues" link which was wrong.

@RByers RByers closed this as completed Dec 20, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants