On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 10:43:10 +0100, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Oliver Hunt wrote:
Another thing that we need is some way to determine what the device
pixel-css pixel ratio is. Currently there's isn't even a
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:52:33 +0100, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
The moment people start using getImageData() as storage mechanism
(which they will if browsers do not fix their data: image origin stuff)
you'll have a problem
So you want
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, Philip Taylor wrote:
The ImageData object's width is greater than zero. (and subsequent
lines) is wrong, since it's talking about an object that's explicitly
not an ImageData.
That entire section is now gone.
What happens with NaN in imagedata.data? (NaN is a Number,
On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 10:43:10 +0100, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Oliver Hunt wrote:
Another thing that we need is some way to determine what the device
pixel-css pixel ratio is. Currently there's isn't even a real way to
tell that it's 1:1 -- you would have do do
n Tue, 15 May 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
Also, if it's meant to be required for implementations to allow
that, the spec should say so - it's not normally assumed that any JS
object with the right properties can be used anywhere that an
interface can be used.
Isn't it?
On Sat, 12 May 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
These features are nice but I don't think authors will understand that
imagedata.height != canvas.height (likewise for width). Authors will
just make something that works in their browser and then assume it will
work everywhere else. Which
On May 15, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sun, 13 May 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
(Given that you can create them yourself I'm not sure why ImageData
has readonly attributes, but maybe that would save some additional
checking...)
Ironically, due to the readonly attributes you
