- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 11:59:39 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-fx@w3.org
- Message-ID: <BANLkTikajNt7gdT-yv46na-Jowb8Sxx2Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Tab, wouldn't it be easier if there was a 'background-filter' keyword? Rik On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote: > Right now, the Filters spec defines the CSS syntax with a very > simplistic mapping into SVG - every function is normatively defined by > a simple <filter> that takes the entire source element as input. This > means that the functions themselves don't specify their input, as they > all take a single source image. > > This is mostly fine when you're doing the sorts of things that the > 'filter' property is meant to do. It's a problem, though, when you > want to reuse these cool effects (like sepia(), blur(), invert(), > etc.) on images in CSS for use in backgrounds or other places. I'd > like to see these filter functions also defined in a way that allows > one to apply them to <image> values. > > I'm not sure what the best way to go about this is. A > minimal-disruption route would be to define new <image> values with > functions of the same name that take an <image> argument in addition > to their existing arguments. I could do this in Image Values 4, > perhaps. > > ~TJ > >
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 19:00:07 UTC