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

Re: background-opacity property proposal

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 10:29:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDD1g9agJNKiauiyrArireu9176hCFk-xVntn4H3E8=vsw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style@w3.org
2011/9/9 Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru>:
> Two years later, what is estimated date for filter function (and anything related that would provide result identical to background-opacity) to be at least in candidate recommendation status? And what is estimated date for it to be implemented in real browsers?
>
> Benefit of specific solution over "perfectly universal" (but often too complicated) one is that latter will likely never (well, in 10-20 years) be implemented while specific solution could be implemented in 80% of browsers within half-a-year because it's simple to understand and simple to implement while (at least as for background-opacity) would have no harmful consequence at all.
>
> When (if) "perfectly universal" solution will be ready, web-developers will be free to use it, but, until that, it make sense to provide simple solutions to conveniently solve real-world problems.

Dude, it really doesn't help when you're being both hostile and
somewhat clueless.  Chill.

The 'filter' property is already implemented in all browsers (I think
- it's part of SVG, which they all support now).  Firefox supports it
on HTML content as well, and other browsers should follow in the near
future.  The filter() function is relatively trivial once the rest of
the machinery is in place (which it is).

'background-opacity' is a subset of the functionality allowed by
filters.  Adding duplicate functionality always carries a negative
cost.  It's sometimes useful to add things like this, if the feature
is sufficiently common and desirable and the alternative functionality
is sufficiently complex.  If the balance comes up negative, though, we
should pass on it.  Filtering an image is only slightly more complex
than using 'background-opacity'.  Thus, the WG decided that
'background-opacity' isn't worth adding to the language.

There is no reason to believe that Filters will be unduly delayed,
given that most of the machinery is already implemented in browsers.
Your assertion of "never ([or] 10-20 years)" is completely ridiculous
and without merit.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 9 September 2011 17:30:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:44 GMT