- From: David Levin <levin@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:38:38 -0800
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Oliver Hunt <oliver at apple.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 12, 2010, at 12:16 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >> I'm not saying that the proposed API is bad. It just doesn't seem to > >> solve the (seemingly most commonly requested) use case of > >> rotating/scaling images. So if we want to solve those use cases we > >> need to either come up with a separate API for that, or extend this > >> proposal to solve that use case somehow. > > > > Just for reference I think one thing that people are forgetting that > there is a difference between > > being computationally faster, and being more responsive. > > As I mentioned in my email, if you look at the steps listed, enough of > them happen *on the main thread* that you're spending far more of the > main threads CPU cycles than you'd like. Possibly even more than doing > all the resizing on the main thread. > > With the other improvements suggested by David things do definitely > look different, but those are not in a proposal yet. > There is the other scenario I mentioned, but I'll see what I can do about separately working up a proposal for adding those methods because they were next on my list to deal with. (fromBlob/load may be enough for this.) dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100312/6eb44a0d/attachment.htm>
Received on Friday, 12 March 2010 15:38:38 UTC