W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: Filters spec: CSS vs SVG

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 17:05:49 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTin4wb2DVJGNMg2B61nT9v8k82VuLQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Cc: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>, public-fx@w3.org, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:
>> >> I think all existing markup filters should remain and be available to
>> >> all
>> >> content via the filter property.
>> >
>> > There was a discussion between you and Tab Atkins about this under the
>> > title
>> > 'generators in filters'.
>> > I thought the consensus was to move these to the image values module.
>> > Are
>> > you suggesting instead that they are available in images values and
>> > filters?
>>
>> Yes, all existing filters should remain, as SVG filters.  In the CSS
>> syntax, they're accessible simply by the url() function.
>>
>> However, the filters that are just image servers, like feTurbulence,
>> won't get a facelift as CSS functions in the Filters spec; instead,
>> they'll be part of the Image Values spec, which is the correct place
>> to define new image servers in CSS.  (Their current existence as SVG
>> Filters appears to be a historical accident, possibly as a result of
>> SVG not quite unifying its notion of what an image server is.)
>
> Hi Tab,
> the fact that these image producing filters can be pulled in through the
> feComposite filter means that they're still needed in the new spec.
> Maybe the same filter syntax can be in place in both specifications.

Again, they'll stay as they are in the SVG syntax; we'll still have an
<feTurbulence> element.  However, we won't define a corresponding
version in the CSS syntax in the Filters spec; instead, it'll be
defined in Image Values, since it's actually an image generator, not a
filter.

This is similar to how <feImage> will remain in the SVG syntax to pull
images into the filter pipeline, but the corresponding concept in the
CSS syntax is just the url() function.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 11 May 2011 00:06:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 11 May 2011 00:06:39 GMT