* record canvas mutations
close#60, #261
This patch implements the canvas mutation observer.
It consists of both the record and the replay side changes.
In the record side, we add a `recordCanvas` flag to indicate
whether to record canvas elements and the flag defaults to false.
Different from our other observers, the canvas observer was
disabled by default. Because some applications with heavy canvas
usage may emit a lot of data as canvas changed, especially the
scenarios that use a lot of `drawImage` API.
So the behavior should be audited by users and only record canvas
when the flag was set to true.
In the replay side, we add a `UNSAFE_replayCanvas` flag to indicate
whether to replay canvas mutations.
Similar to the `recordCanvas` flag, `UNSAFE_replayCanvas` defaults
to false. But unlike the record canvas implementation is stable and
safe, the replay canvas implementation is UNSAFE.
It's unsafe because we need to add `allow-scripts` to the replay
sandbox, which may cause some unexpected script execution. Currently,
users should be aware of this implementation detail and enable this
feature carefully.
* update canvas integration test
* part of #80, support mask input options
* close#188 enhance sampling options
Use a more general sampling strategy interface to describe the
configuration of sampling events collection.
Implemented mousmove, mouse interaction, scroll and input sampling
strategy.
There are some long-term issues in rrweb's mutation observer.
A scenario cause problem:
A list of DOM node: n1, n2, n3, n4, n5
Steps of modifying the nodes:
1. remove n1, n2, n3, n4 sequentially
2. append n4, n3, n2, n1 after n5 sequentially
Then we got the added node data like this:
(id: n4, prev: null, next: n3 )
(id: n3, prev: n4, next: n2 )
(id: n2, prev: n3, next: n1 )
(id: n1, prev: n2, next: null)
The problem comes when we try to replay the first add node datum.
Since its prev node is null, we rely on its next sibling n3. But
n3 was not present at this moment, and in previous code, we fallback
to append n4 to the last of its parent node.
The solution is to defer the append of elements that missing
siblings. But it is also hard to tell which node is the first one
that needs to be appended.
Take a step back and rethink the design of the mutation observer,
we've found there are two implementations make things complicated.
1. We set the id to -1 when we seeing some nodes are not serialized yet.
2. We record both previous sibling and next sibling to determine the
position of the node.
But we can do better!
First, we can put nodes with un-serialized siblings
to a queue, and try to add it again later. Then we can just record the next
sibling as 'the single truth' so we can be sure which node is the last
one of its parent.
This patch has implemented the new observer strategy. Data recorded with
the new observer should no longer have any node with id -1. But for
compatibility consideration, we still keep some replayer code that helps
solve legacy data.
* hack together stylesheet observer
* Add test coverage for insertRule/deleteRule on stylesheets
* Add new observers
* update patch based on changes to master
* Functioning event recording
* Remove print statements
* Fix ID usage and mark add vs remove
* Correct type
Co-authored-by: Jon Perl <perl.jonathan@gmail.com>
This is an important patch contains some crtical bug fixes for
the DOM mutation observer.
Previously the observer did not handle complex DOM movement very
well. So in this patch we optimized this by distinguishing moved
node better and added a resolving queue to avoid the error caused
by ordering.
If an element was blocked, its child nodes should also be blocked.
The interactions and mutations on the element and its child nodes
also need to be blocked.
