W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2011

Re: [css3-images] Impl feedback requested - detached elements in element()

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 11:22:14 -0700
Message-ID: <4DC047D6.9040602@jumis.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
On 5/2/2011 10:04 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com>  wrote:
>> On 4/28/11 8:05 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>>> On 4/28/11 10:07 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>>>> Are CSS pixel ratio issues taken into account here?
>>> I'm not quite sure what you're asking here...
>> Is the content regenerated, if it can be, such as the case of an element
>> rendered by scene graph and using a purely vector based model (such as
>> online text with a ttf font) or is it a projection of the bitmap backing
>> store which the render tree of the element generated.
>> That is: when a span with a font size of 12px is used, in a scaled manner
>> (transform), is it regenerated at a higher resolution, or is a low
>> resolution intended, with likely artifacts from scaling.
>> Is there an intention here to reflow and regenerate underlying bitmap data,
>> or is the reference simply a call to redisplay an existing
>> bitmap/rendering?(in reference to moz-element).
> That's an implementation detail.  Ideally, vector-based graphics would
> scaled properly, but it may be easier in at least some cases to just
> reuse the bitmap underneath the element.
Such gaps in implementations would mean that items, such as text, could 
become blurry on some browsers,
sharp on others. Leaving this undefined will lead back into browser 

At least, if there is a standard, it'll be well understood that there's 
some stability as to the
appearance of the content. I'd really like stability here, across major 
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 18:23:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:45 UTC