- From: Simon Sarris <sarris@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:45:34 -0400
- To: Justin Novosad <junov@google.com>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Justin Novosad <junov@google.com> wrote: > > > Yes, and if we fixed it to make it prettier, people would complain about a > performance regression. It is impossible to make everyone happy right now. > Would be nice to have some kind of speed versus quality hint. As a canvas/web author (not vendor) I agree with Justin. Quality is very important for some canvas apps (image viewers/editors), performance is very important for others (games). Canvas fills a lot of roles, and leaving a decision like that up to browsers where they are forced to pick one or the other in a utility dichotomy. I don't think it's a good thing to leave "debatable" choices up to browser vendors. It ought to be something solved at the spec level. Either that or end users/programmers need to get really lucky and hope all the browsers pick a similar method, because the alternative is a (admittedly soft) version of "This site/webapp best viewed in Netscape Navigator". Simon Sarris
Received on Friday, 14 March 2014 20:46:07 UTC