- From: Ben Darlow <ben@kapowaz.net>
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:35:58 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 28 Mar 2008, at 14:09, David Hyatt wrote: > I think this is a neat idea. It does seem to me like only one CSS > property would be necessary though. Really isn't this just about > picking a scaling algorithm for an image, e.g., > > image-scale-algorithm: seam-carving; > > ? > > WebKit actually already supports two scaling modes (although the > ability to use the low quality interpolation mode is not exposed to > CSS but is instead WebKit API). > > Limiting the scope of the seam carving could just involve actually > clamping the size of the object where the image is used, e.g., with > normal max-width/min-width properties. Brad Kemper made a similar comment and I'm inclined to agree; sticking to existing conventions and not overcomplicating the syntax seems like a good way of approaching it. The only possible caveat I'd add is that you may only wish to use this scaling algorithm in a single dimension (particularly as the algorithm itself doesn't work so well on certain types of image). Using max/min-height/width would be the sensible way of limiting how much the method is used to scale the source image, though, so maybe just those would work; but it would feel a bit clumsy having to specify identical values for max and min in a given dimension for this purpose. > One issue with adding properties that affect images is that you run > into the problem of wanting to do the same thing with images > specified in CSS, such as background images, list images and border > images. Definitely. I was wondering about this myself, and it may well be the case that this method would be more useful for background images than inline image elements (in my own work I am far more interested in flexible scaling of background images to complement UI chrome). I'll defer to smarter people on how best to handle this! :) > Is this algorithm unencumbered and freely implementable? The technique was originally submitted as a paper to SIGGRAPH (available online at http://www.seamcarving.com/arik/imret.pdf). There isn't much in the way of legal information concerning who owns the technique, but the tone of the paper suggests the authors were hoping to see it widely implemented. ~B
Received on Friday, 28 March 2008 19:36:40 UTC