W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2013

Re: [css-color][filter-effects] (was: Re: [filter-effects] Tainted filter primitives)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:38:22 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDs21pckqoCFY+cLX-NTSwOMC-hzD8TGSy3vGWQ-pmZiA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Cc: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>, public-fx <public-fx@w3.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
> You don’t need to feel attacked. I was barely saying that the behavior of currentColor changed anyway and probably isn’t compatible to implementations anymore. I don’t think calling currentColor to be “broken” is particularly wrong here. And at least I didn’t say it was a “silly" idea to change the behavior. So please lets get back to solid grounds where this discussion is supposed to be.

Just say that the currentcolor spec doesn't match at least some
implementations, and so changing it further wouldn't be too
problematic.  That's both less hostile and more informative.

(Also, maybe there's translation difficulties? "Silly" is a very innocent word.)

> Lets come back to the topic. You said you don’t want to change the behavior of currentColor to avoid breaking things. On the other hand you are fine to change the behavior of currentColor for feFlood, feLighting and other situations where necessary. I would like to avoid the inconsistency here since that is confusing.

Actually, I misread what roc was suggesting.  ^_^  I'd like to
minimize sanitation.  I'm undecided as to whether it's better to taint
or sanitize.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 13 December 2013 21:39:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:17 UTC