W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Mask property syntax and CSS <image>

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 22:40:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGN7qDBkSsMX-PJg0d3qSsMkaACEMnXFjxOm5Xi85nxQfUUVPA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Birtles <bbirtles@mozilla.com>
Cc: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
o yes.
Yes, change it because it confused me too :-)

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Brian Birtles <bbirtles@mozilla.com> wrote:

> (2012/08/06 13:44), Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
>> Isn't the new mask used as follows:
>>
>>     <rect id ="r_1...>
>>     <rect mask="element(#r_1)">
>>
>> or as CSS (?):
>>
>>     <rect id ="r_1...>
>>     <rect style = "mask: element(#r_1);">
>>
>>
>> If so, I think it's compatible with the css4 element() notation.
>> In fact, I think we want the exact same wording and behavior as that
>> element. (Including the wording on compositing over a transparent
>> backdrop)
>>
>
> It's as Dirk mentioned, the way we described using element() was primarily
> for selection rather than rendering. The rendering is a separate step.
>
> You should be able to use this scheme to target a <mask> element which we
> then process as usual (e.g. interpret the mask region, mask type etc.)
> rather than just rendering it as if it were an image.
>
> This is especially necessary for paint servers when you need to
> disambiguate which child is the stroke and which is the fill.
>
> The way we described it, the selection was scoped to the children of
> element where it is applied. e.g.
>
>   <path fill="select(linearGradient)" stroke="select(solidColor)"/>
>     <linearGradient/>
>     <solidColor/>
>   </path>
>
> The example you gave above, "mask: element(#r_1);", still works if we
> allow a CSS <image> (which includes the element() syntax).
>
> Brian
>
Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 05:40:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 August 2012 05:40:38 GMT