W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2016

Re: [css-images] Added image-rendering:high-quality

From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 17:48:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAFDDJ7zOrTUcx7JY=tTT2=X0urhKdJMGFz4ASdjYLvJeE7DLjw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
The SVG 1.1 version of image-rendering had three values: optimizeSpeed,
optimizeQuality, and auto.
https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/painting.html#ImageRenderingProperty

If CSS is introducing a "high-quality" keyword that is distinct from
"auto", I think that is the natural equivalent to optimizeQuality.

As for what keyword to use, I would lean towards something that emphasizes
the expected behavior (e.g. "smooth" or "interpolate") instead of something
that relies on a subjective term like "quality".  Smooth interpolation
isn't high-quality for pixel art.

~Amelia

On 26 February 2016 at 15:41, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> Per WG resolution from the Feb 17 telcon, I added a "high-quality"
> value to the image-rendering property:
> <https://drafts.csswg.org/css-images/#valdef-image-rendering-high-quality>
>
> The call purposely didn't settle on a name - is the group okay with
> "high-quality"?
>
> The group also mentioned having the old optimizeQuality value be an
> alias for this.  After looking at the spec again, I think I don't want
> to do this - the old SVG version of this property had only two values
> - optimizeSpeed and optimizeQuality, with optimizeSpeed in practice
> meaning "pixelate this", so the current mapping of
> optimizeSpeed=>pixelated and optimizeQuality=>auto seems correct.
>
> ~TJ
>
>
Received on Saturday, 27 February 2016 00:48:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:00 UTC