W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Towards Better Anti-aliasing

From: Jasper van de Gronde <th.v.d.gronde@hccnet.nl>
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 21:40:03 +0100
Message-ID: <4EB05923.8070002@hccnet.nl>
To: Mike Bostock <mbostock@cs.stanford.edu>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On 2011-11-01 18:00, Mike Bostock wrote:
>> I'm doubtful that FSAA will be an acceptable solution since it will apply to
>> the whole destination image. You usually want different rules for images,
>> line art and text.
> I disagree; FSAA is exactly the sort of thing that you'd want on the
> entire destination image. I can't think of any situation where you
> wouldn't want FSAA (if it were supported by the implementation, and
> had zero or positive performance implications). The results of FSAA
> will either be equivalent or more correct than rasterizing shapes
> independently. It doesn't make much sense to enable FSAA for some
> shapes but not others, since FSAA requires a completely different
> graphics pipeline.
One reason could be that FSAA is (with the most common supersampling 
schemes) not that precise, compared to some of the alternatives (it's a 
rather crude, albeit quite effective, method). Also, you may want to 
selectively disable anti-aliasing for certain objects altogether.
Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2011 20:40:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:49 GMT