On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Seth Fowler s...@mozilla.com wrote:
I wanted to get the opinion of this list on how image-orientation and the
img element’s naturalWidth and naturalHeight properties should interact.
On Mar 13, 2015, at 11:56 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
If it happens at the markup level, it should *definitely* affect the
naturalWidth/Height properties. I don't think that's in question at
all. But nobody's moved on the markup issue, so I haven't removed the
CSS
On 14 Mar 2015 05:49, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Janusz Majnert j.majn...@samsung.com
wrote:
On 13.03.2015 13:50, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
A big gap with native is dependable storage for applications. I
started sketching the problem space on
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Seth Fowler s...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Mar 13, 2015, at 11:56 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
If it happens at the markup level, it should *definitely* affect the
naturalWidth/Height properties. I don't think that's in question at
all. But
Dragging dropping an image to save locally, a common image UI
interaction. Regardless of `image-orientation` the file saved isn't going
to change, right?
As a developer my intuition would assume that naturalWidth/Height are
constrained to the physical media and not the EXIF meta data. If you
Janusz Majnert j.majn...@samsung.com writes:
On 13.03.2015 15:01, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Janusz Majnert j.majn...@samsung.com
wrote:
The real question is why having a quota is useful?
The reason developers want it is to know how much they can download
For video the rotation is applied to videoWidth and videoHeight, at least
in Chromium/Blink. A video with rotation metadata is thus indistinguishable
from one where the frame themselves are rotated.
If there's any hope that doing the same for img could be Web compatible,
and Safari's behavior
A big gap with native is dependable storage for applications. I
started sketching the problem space on this wiki page:
https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Storage
Feedback I got is that having some kind of allotted quota is useful
for applications. That way they know how much they can put away.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Janusz Majnert j.majn...@samsung.com wrote:
The real question is why having a quota is useful?
The reason developers want it is to know how much they can download
and store without getting an exception.
Native apps are not
controlled when it comes to storing
On 13.03.2015 13:50, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
A big gap with native is dependable storage for applications. I
started sketching the problem space on this wiki page:
https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Storage
Feedback I got is that having some kind of allotted quota is useful
for applications.
On 13.03.2015 15:01, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Janusz Majnert j.majn...@samsung.com wrote:
The real question is why having a quota is useful?
The reason developers want it is to know how much they can download
and store without getting an exception.
Which
Very timely!
A handful of us working on Chrome have been having similar discussions
around what we've been calling durable storage. In its simplest model a
bit granted by the user to an origin, which then requires explicit user
action before the data might be cleared under storage pressure, so it
12 matches
Mail list logo
