On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Ian Hickson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ian@hixie.ch">ian@hixie.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
There's no practical difference as far as I can tell between hoping that<br>
we can reuse the API, and then finding we can't, and introducing a second<br>
API for high-res screens; and just giving up now and saying that it's a<br>
low-res API, and then adding a second API later when we have high-res<br>
screens. The effect is more or less the same. Given that, I think it's<br>
worth at least trying to see if we get away with it and can in fact use<br>
this API in high-res situations later.<br>
<div><div></div></div></blockquote><div> </div></div>The difference to me as an implementor is that as the spec stands, I have to choose between<br>1) Implement high-resolution canvas backing store and implementing image data per spec, breaking most of the current scripts that are using image-data for all the users who can actually take advantage of that high-resolution backing store<br>
2) Implement high-resolution canvas backing store and quietly violate the spec so that the current generation of image-data-using scripts continue to work<br>3) Don't implement high-resolution backing store, which at least means I don't have to choose between violating the spec and breaking content<br>
<br>Rob<br>-- <br>"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah 53:5-6]<br>