> - I use something better than pixel coverage: pre filtering. > I’m actually really curious about this. Is there a version of this paper that you own copyrights to that you could point us to? http://ip.com/IPCOM/000232657
>> Would you be interested in creating a clean, totally not optimized (and thus >> slow), stand alone version of the rasterizer just for exposition purposes? >> Something for people like me to learn from? Again, I know you have very >> limited time. No rush. >> > > Yes, I could do that. The features provided would be just drawing some shapes > or glyphs, not unlike the snippet above, but trimmed of all superfluous > Morphic stuff and experiments. Just give me a few days and I'll prepare it, > in addition to fixing the "saturated color pixels" bug you mentioned. > I’d also add that for a newcomer, it might even help your rasterization ideas spread more. Much of the discussion here http://www.jvuletich.org/Morphic3/Morphic3-201006.html starts with a discussion about improving on morphic, priming me to think about GUI toolkits and problems that arise there. Much of the meat of the content is about the rasterization ideas, which in my mind are quite different. e.g. you could build many things on the new rasterizer and you could build a new guy toolkit on many different rasterizers :) shawn
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
