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

RE: feTile and feImage -- radical inconsistencies across browsers

From: David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:59:06 -0500
To: "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "'SVG public list'" <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002c01cc9fd2$7085b0a0$519111e0$@net>
Thanks TJ,

Perhaps this helps to explain why browsers have not been a hurry to implement them.

Take a look at the differences here:
http://cs.sru.edu/~ddailey/svg/feImage.jpg
clockwise from upper left: Opera, Firefox, Safari, IE/ASV, Chrome.

This is for the file located at http://cs.sru.edu/~ddailey/svg/feImage1.svg 

Regards
David

-----Original Message-----
From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 11:54 AM
To: David Dailey
Cc: SVG public list
Subject: Re: feTile and feImage -- radical inconsistencies across browsers

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:06 AM, David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net> wrote:
> The overall question I was trying to ask was “does feTile really add
> anything that <pattern> doesn’t? And does <feImage> really do anything that
> <image> doesn’t?” I’m relatively certain that the answer is yes, but it’s
> hard to convince myself in the absence of such oddities.

I believe their only advantage over their respective non-filter
brethren (note that <feImage> is also equivalent to <use>) is that
they can define their own filter sub-region bounds.  Otherwise they're
equivalent to passing a paint server as a filter input.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 17:59:36 GMT

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