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

Re: hit testing and retained graphics

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 09:01:07 -0700
Message-ID: <4E0F40C3.8090708@jumis.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On 7/1/2011 12:15 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> Honestly, attempting to reimplement HTML in<canvas>  sounds like a
> great way to give your competitors a free head-start against you.
This is very you/your-industry centric.

There are several implementations for HTML rendering for output to PDF
and other document formats. Companies have built products based on it.

You seem to misunderstand the diversity of a free market.

Consider that a company might start-up, with the intention of creating
another HTML to PDF rendering utility; or a rendering utility for some 
other format.

By implementing in ECMAScript, they may indeed have a head-start against
other companies implementing in C++;  though ecmascripten and NaCl
are great projects, I'd see greater success sticking to ECMAScript and 
to implement with.

> (Imo, we should continue to make it difficult to do full-featured text
> and UI in canvas, so that it stays painful.  Then we can make it less
> painful to do things the right way, and natural incentives will help
> people make the right choice.)

Why would you say that out loud Tab? The world is hard enough as it is.
It pains me to see this kind of thinking applied to such important 

I should not have to defend free enterprise to developers on a web
standards mailing list.

Received on Saturday, 2 July 2011 16:02:10 UTC

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