On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 03:16:54PM +0100, Jon Nordby wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Cyrille Berger <[email protected]> wrote: > > visibility=visible|hidden (the advantage of this, is that in the future, we > > can support more).
If more values are possible in the future, then we should also define how to react to an unknown value. >From a compatibility point of view, it would be better for an newer application to add a new attribute, and tell the old applications how to interpret this by adding the old attribute until all apps are updated. > Works for us! If anyone has objections, please raise them now. Summary: - use visiblilty=visible|hidden - missing visibility ==> visible - unknown value ==> visible If nobody objects, let's just do it that way. We can still make a forward compatible extension with that, if anyone else cares. > Would it be acceptable to ignore the alpha-locked attribute in an > application? I think so, because it doesn't affect how the image looks. Would be nice if the saved ORA would preserve the value, I guess. _______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
