- From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 07:06:42 +1000
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Cc: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>, public-fx@w3.org
- Message-id: <9AFC3180-A993-4C61-8356-1F58482F5D57@apple.com>
On 20/04/2011, at 6:58 AM, Rik Cabanier wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com> wrote: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 06:23:57 +0200, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Dean, > > This looks very good! > > A couple of questions: > 1. Filter region extensions. > Why do you need to specify this? I can see that this is necessary for > certain types of filters, but for the most common ones, the browser can just > calculate if for you. > Could this be optional? It will for sure make author's life easier... > > Yeah, that's been discussed before, and they're going away, I have an action to remove that (it's basically leftovers from an old SVG 1.2 Full draft). > > > 2. Accessing the background image > Would there ever be a reason to do this? This seems like a very expensive > operation that could be worked around by rearranging the content. > > You're right that it can be expensive to generate. I think in some (rare?) scenarios it is necessary to have something like enable-background. > > A user could put the background content in with the content that has the filter applied to it. > In addition to that, he would also have to draw a white box to make sure that the actual background doesn't peek through where there's alpha. > > This feature could be especially hard to implement in a world where things are accelerated in the GPU It's also worth noting that you could implement the shorthand effects without having a full 'filter'/SVG engine. The shorthands don't need enable-background. (We need a term for the previously-SVG part of the Filters spec. "Shorthands" works ok for the new part. I was going to say "XML" for the other part, but it isn't strictly XML any more. "Markup" doesn't work so well since everything is markup - same with "declarative"). Dean > > There is also the SVG 1.1 backwards compatibility aspect to consider. > > Do we care about this if we move to CSS? SVG1.1 was not designed for this. > > > I think that the optional <x>,<y>,<width>,<height> values in 'enable-background' should be deprecated, because they are useless in practice. We should let the UA compute the necessary background buffer region, and just ignore these values if specified. > > I agree. We can discuss that in the context of the SVG compositing spec. Maybe there are workflows were this makes sense. > > Rik
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:07:14 UTC