- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 16:42:23 +0000
- To: public-fxtf-archive@w3.org
Sorry I didn't see the edits in December. The change doesn't seems to address the original issue, that a concrete object size cannot be assessed for an `<image>` in isolation. It always needs the context in which it is used. My suggested text would be: > The `filter()` function has no effect on > the [object size negotiation](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-images-3/#object-negotiation). > The size of the image, before and after filtering, > must be the same as if the source image was directly used in place of the filter function. > Filter- and filter effect regions are sized according to the > resulting [concrete object size](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-images-3/#concrete-object-size) of the input `<image>`. Note that this does not allow you to use a filter to increase the size of the input image: the filter results would be clipped to the concrete object size. PS, @dirkschulze Are you planning to defer `filter()` to level 2, or have you got implementation commitments from anyone? -- GitHub Notification of comment by AmeliaBR Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/177#issuecomment-392273088 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 26 May 2018 16:42:31 UTC