- From: Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 09:32:32 +0100
- To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Cc: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On 9 February 2016 at 03:18, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 12:14 AM, Sebastian Zartner > <sebastianzartner@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 6 February 2016 at 09:28, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> Implementing ::backdrop for every element would be pretty hard for us and >>> not something I'd want to do. >> >> >> >> Can you elaborate on this? > > > ::backdrop only applies to "top layer" elements so there's some > special-casing we can do to simplify the layout and rendering of ::backdrop. > If you allow ::backdrop on non-top-layer elements then it can appear > anywhere. Yes, that was the point here. I'd like the new properties I proposed to apply everywhere and get rid of ::backdrop. >> And would it generally be hard to implement or only for Mozilla? > > I don't know. That question was actually directed to the other UA implementors. :-) >> And if it's generally hard to implement, let's discuss another solution. >> And what about the other parts of the suggested approach? > > I guess I don't understand why we need backdrop-filter at all. Why can't > authors use BackgroundImage with the 'filter' property to get the same > effects? Is it because they'd have to use SVG filters and a standalone CSS > property is easier to use? I think so. It was the same reasoning for introducing the filter functions to CSS, right? Side note: If I'm not mistaken, also, because no browser (also Inkscape, don't know about other UAs) supports BackgroundImage (correctly) at the moment. Sebastian
Received on Thursday, 11 February 2016 08:33:22 UTC