- From: Michael Mullany <michael@sencha.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 17:19:29 -0700
- To: David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net>
- Cc: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, public-fx@w3.org, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Message-ID: <CABTYPJmwj9H_+65Hb1176ma1WAFVSV8tOQeVav3mC9WcREpc=g@mail.gmail.com>
> > (as an aside - filter animation performance with SMIL on IE10 is actually > pretty spectacular.) > please replace "SMIL" with "JavaScript" - of course (doh) > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:06 PM, David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net>wrote: > >> So let me see if I understand:**** >> >> ** ** >> >> **a) **Is compositing for CSS seen as a replacement or even a >> substitute for filters….**** >> >> **b) **Will work on SVG filters be abandoned allowing “compliant >> browsers” to (as per the long term wishes of some of them) duck >> implementation of the hard stuff?**** >> >> **c) **Will there be a CSS module separate from compositing to >> handle the broad spectrum of SVG filters? i.e, is CSS-filters forking into >> two parts: compositing and the other stuff?**** >> >> **d) **By virtue of being composited in order and not as a tree, >> css-compositing is intrinsically weaker than SVG filters. On the other >> hand, I gather that there is functionality being offered in css-compositing >> that is either not present in SVG’s feComposite or because of collusion >> between certain browsers never going to be implemented by them. If so will >> that additional functionality be added into SVG (in a real DOM approachable >> sense and not involving goofy CSS sleight of hand)??**** >> >> I’m trying to see if I need to pay closer attention to these issues or if >> it only matters to the HTML/CSS crowd. Periodically it seems browsers >> conspire to cripple SVG, be it through proposing <canvas> or through not >> implementing SMIL or SVG-fonts or enable-background or by moving half-cool >> stuff to CSS, and I suppose I should pay enough attention to know when to >> start reading up on the laws that govern fair competition! jiji. Chiste! >> Or maybe I’ll have to release new chapters of the books I’ve written and >> redo 1400 pages of examples done for class. But in the words of one >> implementer “there is no content out there that matters – we’ve already >> looked!”**** >> >> ** ** >> >> David**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* Rik Cabanier [mailto:cabanier@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Thursday, May 23, 2013 7:02 PM >> *To:* public-fx@w3.org; www-style list; www-svg; David Baron; Robert >> O'Callahan >> *Subject:* [css-compositing] new Editor's draft posted -> update**** >> >> ** ** >> >> After talking this over with our engineers, it turns out that the >> invisible 'layers' that browsers create, are not actually a problem.**** >> >> This is because they are composited in order and not as a tree (at least >> on webkit and blink).**** >> >> For instance, if you have content like this:**** >> >> <video>...</video>**** >> >> <div>**** >> >> <p>...</p>**** >> >> <p style="mix-blend-mode">...**** >> >> ** ** >> >> there will be 3 layers on the back-end: one for video, one for the <div> >> and for the <p> with the blending.**** >> >> This content will be composited as a list so <p> will composite and blend >> with the composited result of <video> + <div> which is the desired behavior. >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> I updated the spec and removed that particular issue. I also worded it so >> blending will happen between stacking context (which is what David Baron >> suggested in an earlier email)**** >> >> There will still be work needed on the implementation side to plumb this >> i, but I think this will suffice for the specification.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Rik**** >> >> ** ** >> >> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: >> **** >> >> As a quick recap, people voiced concerns about the following issues >> before:**** >> >> - background-blend-mode blends with the entire backdrop of the element*** >> * >> >> - does mix-blend-mode create a stacking context?**** >> >> - what is the backdrop of mix-blend-mode?**** >> >> ** ** >> >> The spec was changed so:**** >> >> - images that have background-blend-mode applied will only blend between >> themselves and the background color**** >> >> - mix-blend-mode always creates a stacking context**** >> >> - the backdrop is the stacking context of your ancestor -> this still >> needs more discussion and is marked as an issue since it could be the >> ancestor layer.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> CSS constructs that create groups or layers, is something that developers >> are getting more familiar with.**** >> >> I realize that browser vendors are hesitant to specify them but it looks >> that Google is starting to educate its users about them.**** >> >> ** ** >> > >
Received on Friday, 24 May 2013 00:28:32 UTC