"Matt Brubeck" <mbrub...@mozilla.com> wrote in message news:525eb9f5.8050...@mozilla.com... > On 10/15/2013 1:36 PM, al...@yahoo.com wrote: >> Why are these ignored? > > I can't speak for anyone else, but I would guess it's because no one who > has looked at them has figured out any useful information to add, or found > the time to investigate further. > > As to whether we should pull someone off of other tasks to focus on these > XP text-rendering bugs, that's tricky. They are user-visible regressions > and a large portion of our users are on XP. On the other hand, they do > not affect web content; XP is a (slowly) shrinking platform; and the > difference between grayscale and subpixel AA is jarring to some users but > subtle or invisible to others. > > In general, if I understand correctly, it's hard to use native subpixel AA > in layers that use hardware accelerated compositing. So in some cases we > might need to choose between speed and subpixel rendering. (I'm not at all > an expert in this area, though.)
This is non accelerated rendering using old, stable, xp era rendering apis. There's no question that proper cleartype rendering can be achieved. This all used to work even with the post 4.0 rendering susbsytem, these are relatively recent regressions (15, 18, 27). It's unreasonable that after a decade of adequate rendering on xp it should start falling apart like this. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
