- From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:39:33 -0800
- To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
- CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, Matthew Turvey <mcturvey@gmail.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
SVG-based image editors are written in flash. ;-) It's not any different than an SVG based button. Yes, we're just trying to get vendors on board, supporting DOM in places they didn't. My comment relating to the way that HTML Canvas Element was traditionally implemented. It's typical for a Canvas implementations to be treated as a simple element, just an image with a dynamic backing. I didn't realize the Canvas sub-tree was useful when I wrote my implementations. Now that we've all figured that out... Once we allow that sub-elements can receive focus, the Canvas implementations are updated to use some of the same semantics as form controls, internally. They have flow, they may have focusable elements that are not visible on screen. They become a render block, or a frame, instead of being a simple element with no children. With SVG, I am more often using <button><svg /></button>, with Canvas, I'm more often using <canvas><button /></canvas>. Small distinction, not very important. -Charles On 2/7/2012 1:22 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote: > How is this different than the various SVG-based image editors (etc.) that > have existed for years? SVG elements, as well as the Canvas element (and > static<img>) all live in the DOM can be interacted with. > > Input, to me at least, means not so much that the user can interact BUT > that the values from input will be read/submitted. > > Leonard > > On 2/7/12 4:09 PM, "Charles Pritchard"<chuck@jumis.com> wrote: > >> Canvas is widely used for interactivity. The basic example in the HTML5 >> specs is a checkbox example. >> >> >> The majority of Canvas uses are for UI, not simply for procedurally >> generated images. >> While you can generate some interesting images via script, a static PNG >> file makes more sense in distribution. >> >> I found that one out with an extension to a drawing application. I'm >> sure people in Adobe have seen this as well with things like illustrator. >> >> I was so happy that we were capturing all of the information needed to >> redraw an image. Then, I noticed that it took longer to redraw >> the image than it did to download a copy that had already been rendered. >> >> The name of this site is a little silly, but it gives a nice view of how >> programmers are using JavaScript in experimentation: >> http://badassjs.com/ >> >> Notice, the Js1k demos are just programmatic images. Those are demos >> though, intentionally tricky and small. >> >> For actual apps, you have something like "Morning Star: An Impressive >> Audio Synth in JavaScript". >> http://badassjs.com/post/16764713909/morning-star-an-impressive-audio-synt >> h-in-javascript >> >> >> -Charles >> >> On 2/7/2012 12:54 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote: >>> This is interesting© >>> >>> What makes you think that Canvas is (or should be) anything more than a >>> programmatically described image? >>> >>> Leonard >>> >>> On 2/7/12 3:40 PM, "Charles Pritchard"<chuck@jumis.com> wrote: >>> >>>> The issue with Canvas is that implementers did not realize that Canvas >>>> is in some abstract sense, a form element. >>>> "the best way to fix it is to make [it] more like a form control" >>>> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50126 >>>> >>>> In all implementations, fixing Canvas seems to be about changing the >>>> object it inherits from. >>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=495912 >>>> >>>> Canvas is not<img>, it's<input>. >>>> >>
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2012 21:42:33 UTC