- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 17:01:41 +0200
- To: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- CC: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, FX <public-fx@w3.org>
Hello Dean, Thursday, October 17, 2013, 11:10:41 PM, you wrote: > On 17 Oct 2013, at 8:59 am, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote: >> Hello Rik, >> >> Wednesday, October 16, 2013, 10:59:11 PM, you wrote: >> >>> It seems that this should work and be lightweight. >> >> Thanks. >> >>> I'm unsure if we should add a new filter element or just update the CSS shorthands. >> >> I suggest both; update the CSS shorthands to point to this, and add >> the filter so that longhand (user constructed) filters can use it as >> one component. > As sucky as the results of hue-rotate currently are, the fact that it > is described as a matrix operation means we can implement it easily > with hardware acceleration on less powerful platforms. Agreed. Also, there will be content where the author tweaked until they got the result they wanted; if we modify the definition in place it will break that content. > For that reason I’d be hesitant to change the definition to something > that would require us to regress performance. So I guess I’m voting > for a new operation and keyword. Yes. -- Best regards, Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 15:01:47 UTC