Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-11 Thread Ashley Gullen
It's an interesting option to create a non-premultiplied ImageBitmap and convert on to an ImageData. However I was under the impression the point of ImageBitmap was to be drawn "without undue latency", which browsers could interpret as a pre-allocated GPU texture. Doesn't this make it difficult to

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Gregg Tavares
Is there a reason in the proposal many of the options default to "implementation specific behavior"? If the point of ImageBitmap is to get the data (use Image if you don't care), then it seems like having any "implementation defined" options, especially as the default, is just asking for lurking

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Justin Novosad
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Gregg Tavares wrote: > Is there a reason in the proposal many of the options default to > "implementation specific behavior"? > Yes. It is because different browsers have implemented their graphics pipelines in different ways. For example,

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/10/16 1:25 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: In new JavaScript-only APIs we've made the decision to move away from the potentially-confusing HTML style crossOrigin enums in favor of the RequestCredentials enum used by Fetch: https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#requestcredentials. You can see this

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Kenneth Russell
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > From: whatwg [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Xida > Chen > > > We intend to push this feature forward in Blink, particularly we intend > to > > spec and implement the "Strongly desired options"

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Domenic Denicola
From: whatwg [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Xida Chen > We intend to push this feature forward in Blink, particularly we intend to > spec and implement the "Strongly desired options" listed on the Whatwg > proposal page. We would appreciate comments and suggestions on the >

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Ashley Gullen
ImageBitmap is not useful for getting the data from: it still requires synchronous use of a canvas to turn in to an ImageData. I would encourage browser vendors to look at my spec proposal to avoid this: http://wicg.github.io/img-conversion/ On 10 February 2016 at 18:29, Gregg Tavares

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Justin Novosad
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Ashley Gullen wrote: > ImageBitmap is not useful for getting the data from: it still requires > synchronous use of a canvas to turn in to an ImageData. I would encourage > browser vendors to look at my spec proposal to avoid this: >

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Justin Novosad
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 2/10/16 1:25 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > >> In new JavaScript-only APIs we've made the decision to move away from the >> potentially-confusing HTML style crossOrigin enums in favor of the >> RequestCredentials enum

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Kenneth Russell
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Justin Novosad wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > > On 2/10/16 1:25 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: > > > >> In new JavaScript-only APIs we've made the decision to move away from > the > >>

Re: [whatwg] Reviving ImageBitmap options: Intend to spec and implement

2016-02-10 Thread Robert O'Callahan
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Justin Novosad wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Ashley Gullen wrote: > > > ImageBitmap is not useful for getting the data from: it still requires > > synchronous use of a canvas to turn in to an ImageData. I would