W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-canvas-api@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: You Got Your SVG in my Canvas! Mmm, Delicious!

From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 13:33:08 -0500
To: "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>
Cc: public-canvas-api@w3.org, public-canvas-api-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFA0D635CE.80514B0E-ON862578C0.006586BD-862578C0.0065E916@us.ibm.com>

If the SVG approach is not acceptable, can you offer a suggestion as to how
we can associate the bound of an object drawn on canvas with a canvas
subtree DOM element to address the accessibility issue discussed, -
preferably with additional mainstream benefit such that the author does not
have to think so much about having to maintain the bounds?


Rich Schwerdtfeger
CTO Accessibility Software Group

From:	"Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>
To:	public-canvas-api@w3.org
Date:	07/01/2011 12:58 PM
Subject:	Re: You Got Your SVG in my Canvas! Mmm, Delicious!
Sent by:	public-canvas-api-request@w3.org


Doug wrote:

> I agree with others on this list that a retained-mode Canvas API is a
> bit of a contradiction, and that SVG is better suited (designed, in
> fact) for retained-mode graphics.


> I suggest that rather than adding more retained-mode shape features to
> the Canvas API or shadow tree, that we simply allow the SVG and Canvas
> to be used more seamlessly together[…] I wrote up some more detailed
> notes on my blog, and I'm interested in hearing feedback[…]

While painting, the render tree needs to be immutable. There are some
unfortunate legacy cases where this doesn't hold (plugins, mainly), but
we'd be really reluctant to allow new cases in which the render tree can
change out from under us while painting. Which means that scribbling on
an SVG element with the 2d context API while painting is a non-starter.


(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

Received on Friday, 1 July 2011 18:33:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:10:31 UTC