Consider to have a separate spec for Long Animation Frame API

[sefeng211]

At the moment Long Animation Frame and Long Task are both included in the same spec, I think this could potentially lead to the same issue as LCP. When one implementer only implements half of the spec and they only want to adopt half of the spec to the charter.

Should we consider to have a standalone spec just for Long Animation Frame?

[yoavweiss]

That makes general sense.

Here's a suggested plan:

• Create a separate repo: long-animation-frames
• Move the relevant spec language to that repo
• Publish that as a FPWD (@caribouW3 - that requires a CfC, right?)
• @caribouW3 - Would that require amending the charter to add that repo as a deliverable? Would such an amendment require involving the AC? (as we're not changing scope here, just creating an extra repo)

I'd love y'all's thoughts on the above!

[caribouW3]

• Create a separate repo: long-animation-frames

-frames or -frame ?

• Move the relevant spec language to that repo
• Publish that as a FPWD (@caribouW3 - that requires a CfC, right?)

yes

• @caribouW3 - Would that require amending the charter to add that repo as a deliverable? Would such an amendment require involving the AC? (as we're not changing scope here, just creating an extra repo)

No need for a change, it's also a spec split. A WG CfC will be sufficient.

[caribouW3]

Done, https://github.com/w3c/long-animation-frames