Re: [masking] Comments on September 13 editor's draft

On 9/13/13 4:23 PM, "Dirk Schulze" <> wrote:

>> The last paragraph of 5.11.1 needs an "or the luminance..." clause.
>I am unsure what you mean here. The whole section handles the two cases
>for mask-source: alpha masking and luminance masking. Alpha masking is
>the second paragraph, luminance are the following paragraphs. The last
>paragraphs just give a guidance on how to proceed with different kind of
>image sources like single channel image, three channel images and so on.
>The last paragraph says that the effect of masking is as if you would
>multiple the alpha channel of your content with the mask value (luminance
>or alpha value dependent on the masking operation you chose).

Ah, I was wrong, and the sentence in the spec is correct. I was flipping
the two sources in my misreading.

>> It may be better to duplicate the appropriate descriptions of values and
>> other explanations of the mask-box-image-source property that are
>> applicable from the mask-source property.
>The mask-source property just applies to <mask> elements. It had no
>relation to any of the other properties.

Sorry - I meant the mask-image property. The mask-box-image-source
property allows 'none' or <image>. There is no text below that says what
the various kinds of <image> mean for the property (though if you're using
the oldest reference, you probably just need the one <image> entry). And
it has the same stacking context text as mask-image, but what happens in
an image loading failure is different. If the value of
mask-box-image-source points to an empty image, does the mask still occur?
I was thinking it would be best for the mask-image and
mask-box-image-source descriptions to be as similar as possible.



Received on Friday, 13 September 2013 14:38:25 UTC