- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 14:47:32 -0700
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-fx@w3.org
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. > > wouldn't it be easier if there was a 'background-filter' keyword? Not really. Backgrounds are only one of five places we currently use images (content, background-image, list-style-image, border-image, cursor). All of these are potentially useful to filter. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 21:48:19 UTC