- From: Paul Bakaus <pbakaus@zynga.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 08:43:05 -0700
- To: Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Joćo Eiras <joao.eiras@gmail.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Just wanted to throw in Sylvester, which is a fairly cool Math JS lib for generic Matrix and Vector computations (http://sylvester.jcoglan.com/). I especially like it as the API feels like it is designed for human beings. Having Matrix/Vector as generic interfaces sounds like a big win. Am 18.03.11 21:50 schrieb "Chris Marrin" unter <cmarrin@apple.com>: > >On Mar 15, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com> wrote: >>> I think it would be nice to unify the classes somehow. But that might >>>be difficult since SVG and CSS are (necessarily) separate specs. But >>>maybe one of the API gurus has a solution? >> >> We just discussed this on Monday at the FXTF telcon. Sounds like >> people are, in general, okay with just using a 4x4 matrix, though >> there are some possible implementation issues with devices that can't >> do 3d at all. (It was suggested that they can simply do a 2d >> projection, which is simple.) > >I don't think there are implementation issues other than performance >related ones. As you say, you can always flatten a 3D matrix for use in a >purely 2D renderer. We do this in the WebKit implementation in some >cases. But doing 4x4 matrix math can be expensive, especially on less >capable hardware,. So it would probably be valuable to have a set of 2D >affine calls on any future 4x4 class, so an implementation can easily >optimize by knowing they can get away with doing a subset of the math if >all the operands are 2D affine matrices. But that's just a bit of extra >API. > >----- >~Chris >cmarrin@apple.com > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 22 March 2011 15:43:44 UTC