On Friday 2006-07-21 09:07 -0700, L. David Baron wrote:
On Friday 2006-07-21 11:14 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
I gather that a normative reference to the Porter–Duff paper is needed:
http://keithp.com/~keithp/porterduff/p253-porter.pdf
Perhaps, assuming that's what's been implemented,
On Friday 2006-07-21 11:14 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
I gather that a normative reference to the Porter–Duff paper is needed:
http://keithp.com/~keithp/porterduff/p253-porter.pdf
Perhaps, assuming that's what's been implemented, although that would
only define 10 of the 12 operators in the
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 03:50:39 +0200, L. David Baron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The values of globalCompositeOperation are very poorly defined:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#globalcompositeoperation
Some math is probably needed; prose alone seems unlikely to be
sufficient.
The values of globalCompositeOperation are very poorly defined:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#globalcompositeoperation
Some math is probably needed; prose alone seems unlikely to be
sufficient.
I made a quick test at:
http://dbaron.org/tests/canvas/composite-operations
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, L. David Baron wrote:
The values of globalCompositeOperation are very poorly defined:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#globalcompositeoperation
Some math is probably needed; prose alone seems unlikely to be
sufficient.
I agree; indeed I think there's
