- From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 05:56:06 +1100
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Cc: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-id: <8352FB3E-2535-4FDF-ABD7-05125E84ADEB@apple.com>
On 27/11/2011, at 3:58 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote: > I've proposed JS shaders in addition to glsl. There are a few things against JS shaders: - The GLSL horse has already bolted. It's part of WebGL. - There is a huge amount of content already out there using GLSL (both on and off the Web). - Many many tools support it. - There are many things we'd need to add to the JS language in order to map to GPU types. - Unless people completely understand the conversion to the native shading language, then debugging and performance tuning could be difficult. There are a few things for it too: - It might be more acceptable to those platforms (platform?) that don't have GLSL by default, assuming JSS can be easily converted to GLSL or HLSL. - It's JavaScript, which many developers will be familiar with (on the downside, it won't necessarily look like regular JS). - It might better enable a software rendering mode I think we need a concrete proposal otherwise this is stuck in the "wouldn't it be nice" box. Dean > On Nov 26, 2011, at 8:42 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Dean, >> >> What if we extend the SVG compositing spec to include CSS and provide the ability to do a custom blend using glsl? It seems pretty straightforward to come up with a syntax since the notation is basic. >> If we combine this with transitions, it seems that this would be powerful and also enable your use case. >> >> We do need to come up with a way to calculate background in a HTML context both for compositing and filters... >> >> Rik >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote: >> This is a completely half-baked proposal, but I figured it was ok to embarrass myself on this list rather than forget about the idea. This is definitely not a proposal from Apple as a whole. Just one fool mumbling in public. >> >> The cross-fade() function is going to be extremely useful. However, cross-fading is one of many blending operations [*]. IIRC SMPTE (and the larger SMIL spec) list a set of predefined functions like wipe, iris, dissolve, etc. >> >> [*] The terminology is going to be confusing. Typically such operations are called 'transitions' but that term already has a meaning in CSS. Obviously 'blending' here isn't the same operation as you typically associate with compositing and Photoshop-like effects. We're just talking about moving from one image to another image over time. >> >> I wonder if we should add another operation to CSS 4 images that allows more blending operations. My suggestion would be to allow a CSS Shader with three hard-coded inputs (like cross-fade): image1, image2 and amount of blend (0 - 1). This would allow for some pretty snazzy effects. >> >> cross-fade would just be the special/common case of e.g. image-blend(crossfade, image1, image2, 0.4) >> >> [1] Here's the SMIL set of predefined transitions: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-SMIL2-20050107/smil-transitions.html >> >> Dean >> >> >>
Received on Sunday, 27 November 2011 18:56:48 UTC