W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2010

RE: [css3-background] Where we are with Blur value discussion

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:53:33 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E21520211@TK5EX14MBXC111.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Check, thanks. Then I'm not sure I understand how Aryeh knows Opera is correct. Note that I'm
not saying he's wrong; I'm saying *I* don't get it :)

And it sounds like we already have some amount of fail for authors. Although that may
also be a reflection of my blind spots. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 4:15 PM
To: Sylvain Galineau
Cc: Aryeh Gregor; L. David Baron; Brad Kemper; Simon Fraser; Brendan Kenny; www-style list
Subject: Re: [css3-background] Where we are with Blur value discussion

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:
> OK so you mean that it works as you expect because you get the same result for equivalent inputs across SVG, canvas and CSS.
> That's what I thought but I wanted to check because I strongly support 
> this criteria. Any solution that would require authors to monkey with input values when jumping from one feature to the other would be a fail imo.

Not exactly.  SVG takes a number of stdevs as input.  <canvas> takes roughly twice the number of stdevs, with a different scaling factor above and below 4stdev.  CSS takes a number with absolutely no defined meaning right now, though in some cases it might be treated similar to how <canvas> treats its input.

~TJ

Received on Thursday, 15 July 2010 23:54:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:29 GMT