W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2010

[whatwg] toDataURL image/jpeg composition

From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 13:08:37 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTikaQ+aRDU20Qa7AiarmdOpNoREWv5dQ0DLhA-Ki@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 1:06 AM, Charles Pritchard<chuck at jumis.com> ?wrote:
> Currently, Firefox and Safari output image/jpeg in a way that differs
> from
> the spec:
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11431

>> is there a reason you haven't found/filed bugs in
>> bugzilla.mozilla.org/bugs.webkit.org?

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:35 AM, Charles Pritchard <chuck at jumis.com> wrote:
> WebKit has had a bug standing for awhile. I've pinged their mailing list.
> IE9 exhibits behavior per specs.
>
> The appropriate Mozilla coders are active on this mailing list,
> and this may be a policy decision, opposed to defect.

It may be, but without seeing all the cards, it's hard for anyone to
give any informed opinion.

> On that note: was the following resolved?
> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39177

I'm afraid i'm going to mix metaphors. (the ones that come to mind are
Bad Pool and Show Your Cards / Don't Keep Cards Up Your Sleeve)

This is an open group, the bug trackers are all open. But none of us
have infinite time. If you know of 3 related bug reports in 3 distinct
bug trackers, then you should not provide just one URL to one of them,
unless that one has links to the others. You SHOULD instead provide
the urls for each of the bugs in each of the bug trackers.

I consider it rude to expect others to do research to discover
pertinent information you already have.

> Oliver's response wasn't much help.

Oliver's response was a statement explaining what he/the webkit
team/apple felt was the right thing from a deployed browser
perspective. it's a useful statement. that it didn't help you is
unfortunate, but bug trackers are not just for you. it helped me.

> My prior understanding was that this issue was resolved,
> by changing the spec, and FF changing its behavior to match.

That's interesting, because you opened this conversation by saying
that firefox doesn't match some spec.

If you want implementations to change, you need to politely convince
the implementers. If the implementers want the spec to change, they
need to politely convince the group/editor.

If you have made requests to the various groups, and they're public,
then you should provide references so that people can see them and
perhaps help you in your efforts.

WebKit contact information: http://webkit.org/contact.html
this includes an irc channel. If someone wants help getting a bug
confirmed, that's where I'd go to get it.

WhatWG also has an irc channel where you can ask questions:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/IRC

Mozilla has an entire network: http://irc.mozilla.org/

Chromium developers apparently have a technical channel, otherwise it
seems they ask people to use a forum:
http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chrome/thread?tid=17edbc7003e10f7c&hl=en

Opera has an irc server: http://irc.opera.com/

I'm not sure about the preferred ways to send feedback to microsoft
about IE, but I'd imagine you could figure it out from
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/

Lastly, bugzilla's (a number of which are referenced here) support
"see also", so if you know of bug numbers for the related elements in
webkit/mozilla you can add those bugs into the w3 bugzilla see also
field, which would make it easier for future readers of the w3 bug to
check the status of the related reports.
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2010 03:08:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:02 UTC