W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: exposing CANVAS or something like it to Web Workers

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 17:58:09 -0700
Message-Id: <71E70EF5-1BF0-4C25-A843-C18415BFB432@jumis.com>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
On May 14, 2012, at 5:50 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:

> On 5/14/12 8:21 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>> SVG and animated gif would render the same as it would in an
>> Image that has not been added to the dom or is otherwise display: none.
> 
> I'm not sure that would be workable in a worker for SVG, for the same reasons that responseXML is not available in workers: it involves DOM elements.  Unless the SVG rasterization happens on the main thread under the hood and the raster data is then sent over to the worker.  This might have ... surprising performance characteristics.

I agree... Can we get this off the main thread? Svg via image is not quite the same as svg via HTMLDocument (I guess I mean, embedded).

Afaik, svg via image does not have any script controls but it does have xsl things. 

I've never tried to abuse the distinction via embedded blob Uris and such.

Put in other words: <img src=image.svg> may use an entirely different implementation than <svg> in an HTML document.
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 00:58:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:52 GMT