- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 11:01:16 -0700
- To: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- Cc: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGN7qDC+BaVhWt3SEBg+-1qHjAB6U4hYXdoxyNJEde-RdFwVTw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote: > > On 18 Sep 2013, at 1:05 pm, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > I suggest adding a new keyword 'backdrop' as CSS Image. This can be > filtered with the CSS Image filter()[3] function and blended with > background colors or background images and the 'background-blend-mode' > property. This would produce results where the backdrop directly behind the > element would always be blurry, but around the element it isn't. This looks > even nicer on scrolling and other interactions. > > I think I suggested a separate property: background-filter (I can’t > remember if I emailed this, or spoke up at a meeting, or just thought of it > in the shower). > The reason is that I think in most cases you want to draw normally and > just apply the effect to the background. There is no need to consider the > content of the element to be filtered for this effect. However, the name is > a bit misleading because, as you know, it is not filtering the element’s > background (in CSS terms), but its backdrop. > Maybe backdrop-filter is less confusing. > > [Aside: I know that we proposed primitive blending and transformation > operations for shorthands in the early days, so you could apply a filter > and blend it into an unfiltered form of the element.] > > > As a note, this keyword would still need to rely on the definition of > isolation groups[4]. Every element creating an isolation group because it > has a stacking context or the 'isolation' property set to 'isolate', will > have direct effect on this keyword and the requested backdrop. (The same > way as it influences the 'mix-blend-mode' property[5].) > > So, here is where it gets tricky. Background/drop filtering is quite > expensive, and sometimes extremely expensive in some compositing set ups. > In the worst case a browser will have to draw the tree twice, possibly > reading back pixels before applying the effect. And that could be per > element that has a filter. We can define isolation groups to make this > easier, but this will be quite difficult to understand. > Well, we're already there with CSS filters and blending:-) > > In our experimentation it’s quite confusing that changes in sibling > elements or random properties can trigger a situation where the background > becomes difficult to obtain or radically slower. > > Window servers often do these effects with tricky hacks. Their content is > also nowhere near the complexity that a Web page can be. > > I guess I’m saying that, like blending/compositing, I’d really love to > expose this, but it could be a pain to implement and difficult to author. Would it be possible to implement this practically on Safari? I thought there was an API to do apply a filter during compositing but I can't find it in the documentation.
Received on Thursday, 19 September 2013 18:01:46 UTC