- From: Oliver Hunt <oliver@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 16:28:16 -0700
On Jul 9, 2009, at 4:19 PM, Gregg Tavares wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Oliver Hunt <oliver at apple.com> wrote: > I'd like to make a passionate plea that the spec say > "implementations must > support negative widths and negative heights and draw the image > backward > effectively flipping the result". > > We'd need to be fairly sure that such a change would not break > existing content -- this is a change that would result in > substantially different rendering in some scenarios. > > Given that it's inconsistent in the various browsers it's hard to > see how this would break something since it's broken in 2 browsers > one way or the other currently. Inconsistency doesn't lead to no one depending on a behaviour, it just means sites only work in one browser. Your suggesting would result in sites being broken in all browsers -- the only options from here on out are either nothing gets drawn (as in gecko and presto), or the destination is normalised (as in webkit) > Image scaling is implementation dependent everywhere else, why would > it be spec defined in the case of canvas? > > There are 2 issues here I brought up > > 1) What happens at the edges. > > The results are VASTLY different now. Unless this works consistently > it would be hard to make canvas graphics work across browsers and > expect get reproducible results. The 2x2 pixel example I gave, one > browser ends up scaling with translucency even though there is no > translucent pixels in the source image. This is just an artifact of scaling, and you agree below that scaling is implementation dependent. > > 2) How it does the scaling. > > I agree that it being implementation dependent is probably fine. > > > > > --Oliver > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090709/4b093fd3/attachment.htm>
Received on Thursday, 9 July 2009 16:28:16 UTC