Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Delegated Ink Trail (#473)

Thanks for the comments! I've addressed them in the explainer, but to clarify here:

- We've been prototyping with `diameter` being in CSS pixels as that is what felt most intuitive, so I've made that more explicit. I don't think a string would be necessary for `diameter`, as I think the number of cases that it would be easier to use than CSS pixels would be very limited in scope, and not necessarily much harder to do in CSS pixels.

- Good catch on presentationArea IDL syntax, fixed that. Also clarified that it is indeed the border-box in client coordinates that we use.

- Extending the API to allow for shaders and other more complex brushes came up organically on the Chromium graphics-dev post discussing this API, so I don't think it is too difficult to imagine wanting to extend this to support these in the future. Given this, and that there isn't a compelling argument that it shouldn't be there, I'll leave it for now. Happy to continue discussing it if necessary though.

- I see what you mean about the premature extensibility - that makes sense as it can be painlessly extended in the future. I've removed the `InkPresenter` interface.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/473#issuecomment-617290418