Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-06 Thread Rik Cabanier
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Dean Jackson wrote: > > On 07/07/2012, at 10:11 AM, Charles Pritchard wrote: > > >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Edward O'Connor > wrote: > >>> As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need > to > >>> keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-06 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Jul 5, 2012, at 11:28 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Edward O'Connor wrote: >> As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to >> keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I >> doubt any implementors would be enth

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-06 Thread Dean Jackson
On 07/07/2012, at 10:11 AM, Charles Pritchard wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Edward O'Connor wrote: >>> As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to >>> keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I >>> doubt any implementors would b

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-06 Thread Charles Pritchard
On Jul 5, 2012, at 11:28 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." wrote: > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Edward O'Connor wrote: >> As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to >> keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I >> doubt any implementors would be ent

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-06 Thread Rik Cabanier
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Edward O'Connor > wrote: > > As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to > > keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I > > doubt any implementors would

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-06 Thread Ian Hickson
On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Charles Pritchard wrote: > On Jul 5, 2012, at 10:06 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > >> > >> I think its up to the author to manage their set of paths > >> appropriately, independently from the drawing operations. > > > > Having the drawing mechanism work in a tightly integrated fas

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-05 Thread Tab Atkins Jr.
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Edward O'Connor wrote: > As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to > keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I > doubt any implementors would be enthusiastic to implement hit regions > like this. From a WebKi

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-05 Thread Charles Pritchard
On Jul 5, 2012, at 10:06 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: >> I think its up to the author to manage their set of paths appropriately, >> independently from the drawing operations. > > Having the drawing mechanism work in a tightly integrated fashion with the > region code IMHO helps authors avoid bugs.

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-05 Thread Ian Hickson
On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Simon Fraser wrote: > On Jul 5, 2012, at 2:25 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Edward O'Connor wrote: > >> > >> As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need > >> to keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. > >>

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-05 Thread Simon Fraser
On Jul 5, 2012, at 2:25 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Edward O'Connor wrote: >> >> As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to >> keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I >> doubt any implementors would be enthusiastic to

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-05 Thread Ian Hickson
On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Edward O'Connor wrote: > > As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to > keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I > doubt any implementors would be enthusiastic to implement hit regions > like this. From a WebKit persp

Re: [whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-05 Thread Charles Pritchard
On Jul 5, 2012, at 1:05 PM, Edward O'Connor wrote: > Hi, > > As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to > keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I > doubt any implementors would be enthusiastic to implement hit regions > like this. From

[whatwg] isPointInPath v. set of pixels in canvas hit regions

2012-07-05 Thread Edward O'Connor
Hi, As things currently stand in the spec, implementations basically need to keep N+1 bitmaps per canvas, where N is the number of hit regions. I doubt any implementors would be enthusiastic to implement hit regions like this. From a WebKit perspective, we'd much prefer keeping a Path for each hit