- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 22:10:34 +0000
- To: Max Vujovic <mvujovic@adobe.com>
- CC: FX <public-fx@w3.org>
On Nov 3, 2014, at 10:36 PM, Max Vujovic <mvujovic@adobe.com> wrote: > On Nov 3, 2014, at 6:14 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote: > >> 1) treat <feImage> as a transparent black image taking all primitive regions into account, >> 2) replace the missing image with a “missing image” icon and take all primitive regions into account or >> 3) treat <feImage> and all successor color manipulating primitives as null filter. >> >> Example: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=1531 >> Description: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27221#c0 >> >> Option 1) looks reasonable for me and is easy to implement/specify. Option 2) looks strange but at least gives authors feedback of what is going on. I am unsure how to specify 3) and how it actually is implemented. Maybe someone from Mozilla could clarify. > > I debugged Firefox a bit, and it looks like an feImage with a missing resource becomes a transparent black feFlood filter node with a result size of 0x0. I suppose the result size of 0x0 is why successive primitives that manipulate color appear not to do anything. > > It seems relatively straightforward to change it to option #1 if desired. Thank you very much for the investigation! Firefox is kind of neat in my opinion. I really don’t know which of the three options we should take. Greetings, Dirk > > - Max
Received on Monday, 3 November 2014 22:11:07 UTC