Re: hit testing and retained graphics

On 6/30/2011 9:40 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 17:57 -0700, Matt May wrote:
>> Bespin is the most obvious example of this emergence.
> Note that Bespin has abandoned<canvas>  (by being merged into another
> non-<canvas>-using project). I think Bespin can be taken as an example
> of using<canvas>  being "doing it wrong" and the solution being not
> using<canvas>.
Bespin was abandoned by Mozilla; that's a corporate decision, not an 
example of "doing it wrong".

The "wrong" that was done, IMO, was that Mozilla did not bring the a11y 
to the w3c; and other browser vendors have barely moved forward since.

The APIs in place for caret position are similar across operating 
systems. The Canvas shadow dom
enables caret position (within text) and selection of underlying text 
content, as does dataTransfer.
The 2d caret position APIs we passed in Issue 131, as well as 
drawFocusRing, fill in the gap on visualization.

Things considered, with the current w3c draft and web-apps APIs, Bespin 
is reasonably covered.
It doesn't have much to do with "shape" information -- which is the 
current topic -- pointer events
and fidelity to shapes on the screen -- something especially important 
for touch devices.


One of the painful realities of many text editors, especially in the 
browser, is that they are slow/laggy,
as they try to load all of the content into memory and into their 
drawing model.

Some text editors manage content in chunks, allowing users to edit 
multi-megabyte (or arbitrarily larger)
text files, without such slow load time... This is something that 
Bespin's original model had a reasonable
chance of supporting.


Received on Thursday, 30 June 2011 20:10:22 UTC