On Sat, 19 May 2007 09:35:25 +0900, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote :
> On Sat, 12 May 2007 10:58:26 +0200 Simon TRENY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > babbled: > > > On Sat, 12 May 2007 07:14:04 GMT, > > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > > > > > > > > Carsten wrote: > > > > > > > personally, as an intermediate-step i'd like to simply be able > > > > to modify the FILL of an image (or text object) so the FILL can > > > > be transformed (we need to be able to disable tiling for > > > > images). this will then allow for us to provide transformed > > > > image data but within a rect - allowing us to worry about > > > > events later but get the benefits of the visual elements now. > > > > > > I've already done all this. No need to 'disable tiling', > > > that's what the fill-spread modes are for. Recall the > > > shaped-gradient I once sent? Same thing.. except that here we > > > take into account borders and hq down scaling (for the software > > > engines). The gl engine is still a problem - if one wants to do > > > things strictly with gl - since I need code to render to a > > > texture buffer (though it may be possible to use a quad mesh or > > > some such?). > > For the GL engine, you can probably modify the texture matrix to > > transform the filling of an image. I'm not sure how well it would > > work with borders though (but actually, what borders "mean" when > > the fill is transformed?) > > that is a good question. what do borders mean then? i would say that > borders remain "unscaled" at the bounds of the transformed quad (the > quad being the bounds of the image post-transform). Actually, I think it would make more sense if the borders were applied before the transform. Imo, borders describe how the original texture should scale. If the texture is already transformed when borders are applied, it won't be easy/intuitive to predict the result. And it would allow to rotate a bordered-scaled-rectangle for example. If the borders were applied after the transform, the borders of the rectangle would look really weird. > > > > > > > > yup. you can convert a scale + rotate INTO a transform matrix, > > > > but not the other way around (easily). > > > > > > Not difficult - it's impossible in general.. and much > > > depends on the order one wants the transforms to be applied. > > > > > > jose. > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > > > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > > > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > > > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > > > _______________________________________________ > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > > _______________________________________________ > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
