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

Re: [CSS4 color][CSS4 transition] color pre-multiplied vs non pre-multiplied was (Re: [CSSWG] Minutes TPAC Tue 2012-10-30 AM I: Abstract Directions, Transforms, Transitions)

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:00:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGN7qDCVP=BdnnJ+8wVXj6ni1HMF7NfKf9ttgcPRE2_XfsMt5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: liam@w3.org
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-02-26 at 21:23 -0800, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
> >
> > Safari on OSX and iOS won't be able to implement this.
> > Doesn't FireFox use Core Graphics on the mac too? If so, they also
> > won't be able to fix it.
>
> We have to be careful not to let the restrictions of today restrict the
> future. It's not _so_ long ago that most graphics cards were limited to
> 256 colours shared across all windows...
>

non-premultiplied gradients are not a restriction. I can't think of a
single design application or graphics library that implements this idiom.
The CSS WG introduced this so they wouldn't have to special case
'transparent'; not because it made sense.


>
> Presumably Apple could issue an update...
>
> as long as there's a sane fallback.
>

That is always possible. It's more likely that Safari will never implement
this and we end up with incompatible implementations.
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 07:00:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:06 GMT