W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2010

Re: Integration of HTM

From: T.V Raman <raman@google.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:10:08 -0800
Message-ID: <19313.49440.218940.770406@retriever.mtv.corp.google.com>
To: robert@ocallahan.org
Cc: mjs@apple.com, david.bolter@gmail.com, public-html@w3.org
note that the image-map usecase would cover a significant portion
of uses of canvas for UI that today remain out of reach when
implemented via canvas.

Robert O'Callahan writes:
 > On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
 > > I am concerned however about overlaying the canvas with 0.01 opacity divs.
 > > I expect this will have a negative impact on canvas rendering performance,
 > > especially if there are significant animations. Because even though 0.01
 > > opacity likely won't draw anything visible, the browser still has to render
 > > and composite the content on top of the canvas.
 > >
 > In the future we can probably expect most browsers to use graphics hardware
 > in a way that makes the compositing cheap/free. However, opacity:epsilon
 > does seem rather ugly. Wouldn't opacity:0 work here? In Gecko at least that
 > would optimize away almost all rendering (while still catching events).
 > I am also wondering how this technique can be extended to control target
 > > areas that are not rectangles.
 > >
 > I'm wondering that too. I wonder if it would make sense to add some kind of
 > canvas API that lets you associate an element with the current path. Mmm,
 > sounds like image maps :-).
 > Rob
 > -- 
 > "He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
 > the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
 > healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
 > own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
 > 53:5-6]
Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2010 20:11:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:58 UTC