- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:59:05 +0000
- To: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
[Dirk Schulze:] > > > On Feb 11, 2013, at 5:55 PM, James Robinson <jamesr@google.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> > wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > The Filter Effects[1] specification defines the custom() filter function > to extend the predefined filters by new, customized filters including CSS > Shaders, but not limited to CSS Shaders. This was discussed and accepted > by the SVG WG [2]. > > > > Feature detection is important to support future extensions of the spec > and test for the availability. I have an action from the SVG WG to ask for > a new condition 'filter' on the @support rule. This filter descriptor can > take different feature keywords. For CSS Shaders I would suggest 'webgl' > because of the relation to WebGL. More feature keywords can be added by > future versions of Filter Effects allowing other or future shading > languages and parameterized SVG filters. The filter condition would look > like in the following demonstration: > > > > Supporting webgl and supporting CSS shaders are very different things > and I would not expect support for one to imply or match support of the > other. I think you should pick a different keyword. > > I am happy with a different keyword as well. This name was proposed during > the F2F, since CSS Shaders use the by WebGL defined shader language (GLSL > ES with restrictions). In theory you can use a different shading language > to archive the same results. I am open for other name proposals. > Aren't you really trying to check for support for a function e.g. something like @supports (filter:custom()) ?
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 16:00:29 UTC