- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 09:23:03 -0700
- To: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGN7qDC+KeRmOZqCtscUUtZb4PuRR-eUvu_QiO4e8K79VGzh2w@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:47 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote: > > On Apr 23, 2014, at 11:31 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 23, 2014, at 10:00 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> > wrote: > > > >> I'm looking at > >> > >> mask-composite: clear | copy | destination | source-over | > destination-over > >> | source-in | destination-in | source-out | > destination-out > >> | source-atop | destination-atop | xor | lighter > >> > >> and the syntax is completely arcane to me. The examples make sense. > >> But I'm not a graphics-library person, so I can't relate to the > >> vocabulary in use here. > >> > >> Do we have to use Porter-Duff vocabulary, or would it be okay to use > >> more vernacular English for some of these terms? E.g. "source" and > >> "destination" mean nothing to me in terms of CSS objects, so I can't > >> tell what they correspond to. > > I looked more into the behavior of authoring tools. A common pattern seems > to be the following: > > combine/add -> source-over (normal painting) > subtract -> source-out > intersect -> source-in > exclude -> xor > + 1. This is much better than the non-descriptive porter-duff names. > Tools are inconsistent with the use of add or combine. I slightly prefer > combine. > I like 'add' a bit more as 'combine' is longer to type and not as clear. > I didn’t find examples for source-atop neither in content nor in authoring > tools. Maybe it is not that common and could be added later if necessary. > > It is important to understand that the keywords make a lot of sense for > content that is either opaque or transparent. For half transparent shapes, > the operations are similar to what can be seen here [1] (blue filled rect > is destination, red stroked rect source). Either source or destination > would still shine through. That is expected and even the case for xor. > Therefore, I do not see a problem with the names subtract and intersect. > > I will do the changes in the next days. > > Greetings, > Dirk > > [1] https://bug-66762-attachments.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=104816 > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2014 16:23:36 UTC