On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Oliver Hunt oli...@apple.com wrote:
On Oct 16, 2009, at 8:10 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
I think there is a reasonable argument that the spec should be changed so
that compositing happens only within the shape. (In cairo terminology, all
operators should be
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Charles Pritchard wrote:
Turning off anti-aliasing just trades one problems for another.
I'm not sure I understand what that trade is -- isn't that something
that the individual user of Canvas would take into account when flipping
the switch?
Sure, but you're still
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 2:41 AM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
Having gone back and forth with Robert a bit: I was able to recall the whys
of a particular issue
that could be handled in this version of the spec, regarding compositing.
As far as I can tell; the area (width and
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Philip Taylor
excors+wha...@gmail.comexcors%2bwha...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think the spec is clear on this (at least when I last looked; not
sure if it's changed since then). Image A is infinite and filled with
transparent black, then you draw the shape onto it
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think the spec is clear on this (at least when I last looked; not
sure if it's changed since then). Image A is infinite and filled
On 10/16/09 8:01 AM, Philip Taylor wrote:
Windows, Opera 10 passes them all, Firefox 3.5 passes all except
'copy' (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=366283), Safari 4
and Chrome 3 fail them all.
I've read that this was intentional on the part of WebKit.
(Looking at the spec
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 5:47 AM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
Then, should we explicitly state it, so that the next versions of Chrome
and Safari
are pressured to follow?
That shouldn't be necessary. If the composition operation was limited to the
extents of the source shape, the
On Oct 16, 2009, at 8:10 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yes, mostly.
http://philip.html5.org/tests/canvas/suite/tests/index.2d.composite.uncovered.html
has relevant tests, matching what I believed the spec said - on
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Charles Pritchard wrote:
In some implementations: when drawImage is used along with a clipping
path, feathering is applied. This shows up in several projective
transformation demos contrasting Firefox with Chrome.
[...]
On Sun, 4 Oct 2009, Marius Gundersen wrote:
On 10/15/09 6:37 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Charles Pritchard wrote:
I agree it would be good for canvas users to be able to turn off
antialiasing incanvas. But your syntax is not the best way to do
Turning off anti-aliasing just trades one problems for another.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
IT seems like what we should really do is either have UAs oversample
without antialiasing and then downsample for rendering, or, if that is
considered too expensive, provide primitives that make this a non-problem.
For example,
My proposal for an aliasClipping property did not get much of a
response. I suppose
this topic is really one to be mediated between Chrome and Firefox
developers, as
they have taken two valid approaches to clipping.
Marius Gundersen writes:
This sounds like a very good proposal, but can we
I agree it would be good for canvas users to be able to turn off
antialiasing in canvas. But your syntax is not the best way to do that. In
particular, this really has nothing to do with clipping, it's all about
antialiasing, and a boolean property would be just fine here IMHO. It
doesn't matter
Here is a good example of the conflict between Google and Mozilla over
clip():
http://www.imperialviolet.org/2009/09/02/anti-aliased-clipping.html
There is another conflict, with the composition modes between the two,
with Google
again taking another principled stand. I'm sorry I don't
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
Here is a good example of the conflict between Google and Mozilla over
clip():
http://www.imperialviolet.org/2009/09/02/anti-aliased-clipping.html
There is another conflict, with the composition modes between the two,
Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com
mailto:ch...@jumis.com wrote:
Here is a good example of the conflict between Google and Mozilla
over clip():
http://www.imperialviolet.org/2009/09/02/anti-aliased-clipping.html
There is
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
I apologize for not having a better reference -- several of the composite
results
on the following resource have quite different results on Chrome.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Canvas_tutorial/Compositing
That is
There have been a few discussions about anti-aliasing / aliasing in
Canvas implementations.
Of those I read through, the conflict remains.
In some implementations: when drawImage is used along with a clipping path,
feathering is applied. This shows up in several projective
transformation demos
This sounds like a very good proposal, but can we extend it to include other
things than just drawImage? I'm not sure how useful it would be, but it
could perhaps include all the other drawing options, like stroking and
filling paths created with lineTo, arc, etc.
Marius Gundersen
On Sun, Oct 4,
I think feathered isn't a good term. It's vary rarely used in graphics in
my experience. aliasClipping isn't a good term either, since there's no
clipping going on typically.
I would just have boolean property named antialias.
Rob
--
He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our
20 matches
Mail list logo
