- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 07:07:41 -0400
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Gregg Tavares<gman at google.com> wrote: > It's ambiguous because images have a direction.? An image that starts at 10 > with a width of -5 is not the same as an image that starts at 6 with a width > of +5 any more than starting in SF and driving 5 miles south is not the same > as starting in Brisbane and driving 5 miles north. > > The spec doesn't say which interpretation is correct. I think it's extremely clear. The spec gives four points which determine a rectangle, which are in no particular order. The image is rectangular, and is mapped into that rectangle. Rectangles have no orientation, and the operation "paint the source region onto the destination region" couldn't possibly be interpreted as requiring reorientation of any kind. I think you got misled by the diagram, and now aren't reading the normative text of the spec carefully enough -- it's *very* specific (like most of HTML 5).
Received on Tuesday, 28 July 2009 04:07:41 UTC