- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:41:01 +0000 (UTC)
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008, Krzysztof ?elechowski wrote: > Dnia 16-01-2008, ?r o godzinie 02:48 +0000, Ian Hickson pisze: > > On Sun, 20 May 2007, ddailey wrote: > > > Another question arises in my mind in this context: is there any reason > > > that any of the treatments of these effects (like the Porter-Duff > > > operators, darken, saturate etc.) should be any different than they are > > > in the SVG spec? So many things that I see in the treatment of canvas > > > remind me of something so similar to what is in SVG that it makes me > > > wonder why not just reference say http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/filters.html > > > ? > > > > The <canvas> globalCompositeOperation is just defined in terms of > > PorterDuff, which far predates SVG. > > And why does the canvas specification have to pretend that it predates > SVG too? It doesn't, particularly, but it seems simpler to reference the original paper than to reference a document that itself references that paper. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2008 13:41:01 UTC