Re: [css-shaders] subdivision for transparency

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> As for filters, I was really hoping that we'd be able to specify them as
>> purely a 2d effect - as in whatever is composited in the end is a quad, not
>> a mesh, even if the filter itself uses a mesh.
>>
>
> I totally agree. The result of a "custom" filter primitive is flattened to
> an image. Nothing else makes sense, even within a filter chain
>

That's fine in all you want to achieve is filtering effects but that doesn't
fit with the examples shown by Adobe. They're morphing the content in 3d.
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/html5/articles/css-shaders.html#1

In one case they're morphing something to look like a newspaper. It unfolds
but is still interactive once it unfolds.

In another case they're morphing a twitter feed a kind of wavy shape and
they are interacting with it while it's in this wavy shape. I don't see why
the user would think it's not 100% interactive.

So it seems like for this proposal to be generally useful that content needs
to able to be interactive (ie, the user needs to able to click on stuff just
like they can with 3d css). Otherwise the number of use cases for it seems
exceedingly small.







> .
>
> I also suggest that any filter effect immediately flattens its children
>> (even if preserve-3d is set).
>>
>
> Definitely. Gecko does this.
>
> Rob
> --
> "If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not
> in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us
> our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not
> sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us." [1 John
> 1:8-10]
>