On 03/27/2014 10:26 AM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
This sounds like a worthy and interesting idea, but also a very difficult one.
PC games allow the user to turn certain features (mostly graphics
related ones) on and off so that they can find their own level of
acceptable performance/quality. This doesn't seem like the right
approach for viewing Web content.
Yeah, games are a much easier case. The content is known ahead of time
(so the degradation can be carefully tested), and typically graphics
dominates the hardware requirements. In a browser, the former is
untrue, and the latter is often untrue -- degradation of audiovisual
elements seems tractable, but what if it's JS execution that's causing
the slowness?
Perhaps there could be a way to annotate the HTML/JS/CSS code to
indicate which parts are less important. I.e. let the page author
dictate what is less important. That would facilitate testing -- a web
developer with a powerful machine could turn on the browser's "stress"
mode and get a good sense of what would change. Whether developers
would bother with it, though, I don't know.
Nick
Perhaps annotating setTimeout/Interval callbacks and animation frame callbacks
with
{ priority: "low" } and process such callbacks only if we can keep up with 60Hz.
priority: "medium" perhaps when 30Hz.
But anyhow, keeping separate lists for less-important async stuff might make it
simpler for
web devs to opt-in to different perf characteristics.
-Olli
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
