On 2014-09-23, 7:07 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
On 09/23/2014 02:56 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
FWIW, I also emailed www-style to sanity-check my understanding & to see
if there are any other reasons for this behavior-difference:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Sep/0340.html
Turns out there wasn't a strong reason for the difference; Tab's now
updated the ED to remove the requirement that we match "auto" when
downscaling.
Great!
This makes the implementation considerably simpler, which is great. It
also means that "pixelated" will essentially just be a
more-interoperable version of "-moz-crisp-edges", for the time being.
So, what are we planning to do with -moz-crisp-edges?
I think keeping it in its current form may be pointless (unless if we
know this is something that the Web depends on?). If I'm reading the
spec correctly, we can actually unprefix it and make it equivalent to
pixelated, but I'm not sure how valuable that is. I think that this is
allowed by the spec though, so perhaps it should be modified to say how
crisp-edges must be different than pixelated.
(Down the line, we might want to change "crisp-edges" to use a different
scaling algorithm, and then they wouldn't be aliases anymore. The spec
allows us flexibility in choice of algorithm for "crisp-edges" [and
there are other edge-preserving algorithms like hqx that could be
better]. "pixelated" is required to stick with nearest-neighbor, though.)
But there is nothing in the current spec text requiring the two to be
different, right?
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
