- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:14:24 -0800
- To: Stephen White <senorblanco@chromium.org>
- Cc: whatwg@whatwg.org, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Stephen White <senorblanco@chromium.org>wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2012, Jeremy Apthorp wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Jeremy Apthorp <jeremya@chromium.org > > >wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Jeremy Apthorp wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > I'd like to draw non-antialiased lines in a <canvas>. Currently it > > > >> > seems that the only way to do this is to directly access the pixel > > > >> > data. > > > >> > > > > >> > Is there a reason there's no way to turn off antialiasing? > > > >> > > > >> What's the use case? > > > > > > > > Pixel-art style games. > > > > > > Specifically: even with the new image smoothing stuff in place for > > > drawImage, a 1:2 diagonal line will still be anti-aliased (only the > > > antialiasing will look silly scaled up to 2x). > > > > Do you have an example of a game where lines are drawn using a line API > > without antialiasing, then scaled up? Most "pixel art" games I've seen > > tend to use bitmaps for that kind of thing. > > > > > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Justin Novosad wrote: > > > > > > For many types of apps, DOM-based rendering is uncompetitively slow > > > [so we should make text rendering in canvas more controllable] > > > > This seems like something we should fix, not something we should work > > around by having people use canvas instead. Using canvas has all kinds of > > terrible side-effects, like reducing the likely accessibility of the > page, > > making searcheability much worse, etc. > > > > Also, do you have any metrics showing the magnitude of this problem on > > real-world sites that might consider using canvas instead? > > > > > > > If LCD text were enable-able, authors would have to be mindful of a > > > number of caveats in order to avoid rendering artifacts. > > > > Do we have any reason to believe the majority of authors would make the > > right decisions here? > > > > (The main reason we haven't provided control over things like > antialiasing > > is that many authors tend to make terribly bad decisions.) (Before anyone > > gets offended, by the way: that you are reading this almost guarantees > > that you are above average in terms of authoring ability.) > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > > > > > > We'd have to define what happens when you use subpixel antialiasing > > > "incorrectly", because we can be pretty sure authors will use it > > > incorrectly and expect to get interoperable behavior. > > > > That's certainly true. > > > > > > > Mozilla supports a "mozOpaque" attribute which makes the canvas buffer > > > RGBX (initialized to solid black) and enables subpixel antialiasing for > > > most text drawing. That might be enough to address your use-cases. > > > > I haven't specified this; if other vendors intend to implement this let > me > > know and I can spec it. I'm not sure it's worth it though. > > > > [blowing the dust off this thread] > > Folks on the Chrome team are looking into implementing this attribute, and > would be interested in seeing it spec'ed. What are you implementing? Initializing the canvas to black or subpixel antialiasing? > > > > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Justin Novosad <junov@chromium.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Are there precedents for exposing features with documented caveats? > > > > (excluding caveats that were discovered after the fact) > > > > > > Yes, and many of them have been extremely problematic, because Web > > > authors will ignore the caveats. > > > > Right. I'd really like to avoid adding more if we can help it. > > > > > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Justin Novosad wrote: > > > > > > There is a recent improvement in Chrome called "deferred 2D canvas > > > rendering" (enabled by default as of Chrome 23). It is a mechanism > that > > > records 2d canvas commands during JS execution, and only executes them > > > for real when the render buffer needs to be resolved (draw to screen, > > > getImageData, toDataURL, etc.). If you want to check it out, the guts > > > are in Skia: SkGPipe is a sort of FIFO for graphics commands, > > > SkDeferredCanvas is a wrapper that manages the GPipe and automatically > > > flushes it and applies some command culling optimizations. > > > > > > So to come back to the problem of with and without subpixel AA buffers: > > > if rendering is deferred, the non-AA buffer would never get rasterized > > > (and possibly never even allocated), unless it needs to be. Obviously > > > there are practical limitations, for example we cannot store an > > > unlimited stream of recorded commands, so if the canvas draws > > > indefinitely without ever being cleared, at some point we have to > > > rasterize the non-AA buffer just so that we can safely discard the > > > recording data. Also, if at record time the necessary conditions for > > > subpixel AA are not met, perhaps we just forget about it. > > > > > > I admit this is a complex solution for implementors, but it makes the > > > management of subpixel-AA safety transparent to web authors. > > > > I think it'd be reasonable (for some definition of reasonable that > > relates to whether it's compatible with the spec, anyway) for > implementors > > to do this today, without having to expose any control to the author. > > > > > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Fred Andrews wrote: > > > > > > The canvas that scripts draw into could be over-sized with the UA down > > > sampling this to fit the target size and taking into account the > > > sub-pixel screen layout when doing so. > > > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Justin Novosad wrote: > > > > > > Obviously, that would be costly (x3 pixels), but I think it is a very > > > realistic solution and relatively low hanging fruit. The over-sizing of > > > the canvas would have to be handled under the hood by the UA though, > > > because it depends on LCD component ordering and orientation, which > > > means querying the OS/display driver. A lot of the kinks with the > > > over-sized canvas approach have already been ironed out for solving the > > > problem of High-DPI support ( put/getImageDataHD ), and I like the idea > > > of unifying the two. Implementing this would mostly be a matter of > > > adding per color component compositing of canvases. Also, the pixel > > > aspect ratio would have to be taken into account for line drawing. > > > > getImageDataHD() requires that the pixels be square, but so long as that > > is taken into consideration (e.g. by dropping down to square pixels if > the > > author calls putImageDataHD()) I think this could probably be made to > work > > within the spec's current requirements. > > > > > > > Regarding the concerns about accessibility, I think the problem can be > > > solved by using HitRegions with labels. > > > > Oh it _can_ be solved. That's not the problem. Accessibility is not about > > what is _possible_, it's about what actually _is_. Most authors, > > realistically speaking, aren't goin to be using hit regions sufficiently > > for us to declare victory here. > > > > > > > Come to think of it, there should be an option to make the UA do this > > > automatically: create a HitRegion with a label every time text is drawn > > > to a canvas. > > > > I considered doing that, but it gets really fiddly when you're doing > > things like text that fades over multiple frames. In the end I decided > > that the magic wasn't worth it, as it would likely screw up more often > > than it would actually help. > > > > -- > > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' > > >
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 23:14:51 UTC