On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> Does it matter that this solution is in the image world and not 2d canvas?
> It seems that this will have a bigger impact on the browser's codebase
> since it spans images and canvas.
I think that's a good thing --- it's more generally usef
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
>
>> This gives me another
>> idea: we could just have a new Image constructor that creates a new image
>> element that is a subregion of another:
>> var mySprite = new Image(spriteMa
>>
>> "xyz" is inserted as a child of and the order between "abc" and
>> "xyz" is reversed in the tree. We would like to know whether this is an
>> intended behaviour of the specification.
>
> Yeah that's definitely not intentional.
>
> Does anyone have any preference for how this is fixed?
>
On 12/04/2012 09:27 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Olli Pettay wrote:
I think we need to keep the contextmenu functionality, and I don't see
reasons to not to do it the way Gecko has it now (using and ).
Do you mean as opposed to allowing to refer to commands
declared elsewhere
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote:
>> Use Case Description:
>>
>> Linking to specific fragments of media is possible via media fragment
>> URIs [1]. However, it is not possible to apply a link to embedded
>> media declarativ
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote:
>
> Use Case Description:
>
> Linking to specific fragments of media is possible via media fragment
> URIs [1]. However, it is not possible to apply a link to embedded
> media declaratively, for example to link to a specific point in time
>
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012, Jer Noble wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2012, at 12:43 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, adam k wrote:
> >>
> >> i'm aware that crooked framerates (i.e. the notorious 29.97) were not
> >> supported when frame accuracy was implemented. in my tests, 29.97DF
> >> timecodes w
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012, Michael Day wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, that's why the spec hand-waves to transform the line too... but
> > I agree that that doesn't really work.
> >
> > Do you have any suggestion of how to spec this better?
>
> This is the most general arcTo situation:
>
> setTransform(M0)
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
> This gives me another
> idea: we could just have a new Image constructor that creates a new image
> element that is a subregion of another:
> var mySprite = new Image(spriteMap, x, y, w, h);
> This can be implemented in a lightweight way th
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Ralph Giles wrote:
> That said, I'm not convinced this is an issue given the primary
> use-case, which is pretty much that web content wants to do more
> sophisticated things with the metadata than the user-agent's
> standardized parsing allows. If one cares to th
Generally speaking, this feature is useful where the error page is somewhat
routine and contains information comprehensible and actionable by the user,
which would otherwise be lost in the fallback.
This was mainly about 404s, which docs will serve when a requested document
id doesn't exist, which
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
What would help me is to better understand the requirements of the
> shadow DOM with respect to event dispatch. To calculate the dispatch
> tree, you're using the event type, right? Then at certain points
> you're also making modifications
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Isn't this the same as what Ian suggested: copy it to a temporary canvas
>>> and use the temporary canvas scales.
>>> It seems that you can optimize that case too.
>>
>>
>>
On Tue, 11 Dec 2012, David Barrett-Kahn wrote:
>
> We ran into this same problem on Google Docs offline. Our solution was
> to add a proprietary response header to Chrome which instructs the
> browser that the response is not to trigger the fallback entry, despite
> its response code. Somethin
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
>
> Isn't this the same as what Ian suggested: copy it to a temporary canvas
>> and use the temporary canvas scales.
>> It seems that you can optimize that case too.
>>
>
> Hmm... It would one of those optimizations that only works if you pe
> Isn't this the same as what Ian suggested: copy it to a temporary canvas
> and use the temporary canvas scales.
> It seems that you can optimize that case too.
>
Hmm... It would one of those optimizations that only works if you perform
the secret handshake just right.
If I understand correctly,
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>>>
What would be the next step? Sh
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Kevin Gadd wrote:
> A simple way to create an Image that represents a subregion of another
> Image or Canvas would be a nice solution here, since for
> implementations that need a temporary image anyway this lets them
> ensure it's only created once, and it lets
A simple way to create an Image that represents a subregion of another
Image or Canvas would be a nice solution here, since for
implementations that need a temporary image anyway this lets them
ensure it's only created once, and it lets you avoid the costs
associated with temporary canvases. A few
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> What would be the next step? Should we define a new version of drawImage
>>> with the extra parameter?
>>
20 matches
Mail list logo
