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

RE: [css3-background] vastly different takes on "blur"

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:03:04 +0000
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E214F2035@TK5EX14MBXC120.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
There is at least 3 implementations of canvas out there but I think my first concern here is to take a look at all the blur 'APIs' an author may deal with. It couldn't hurt to know and compare.

From: Brad Kemper [mailto:brad.kemper@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 10:14 AM
To: Sylvain Galineau
Cc: Brian Manthos; fantasai; Simon Fraser; Tab Atkins Jr.; robert@ocallahan.org; www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [css3-background] vastly different takes on "blur"

On Jun 23, 2010, at 10:02 AM, Sylvain Galineau wrote:

sensitive to what SVG, canvas et al. do

Canvas is still working draft. Does that mean it can still change? Is it already far too late for that, or for SVG to change (because they have implementations but not prefixes or versions)?
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2010 18:03:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:36 UTC