[whatwg] getImageData/putImageData comments

[Robert O'Callahan]

On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:

> There's no practical difference as far as I can tell between hoping that
> we can reuse the API, and then finding we can't, and introducing a second
> API for high-res screens; and just giving up now and saying that it's a
> low-res API, and then adding a second API later when we have high-res
> screens. The effect is more or less the same. Given that, I think it's
> worth at least trying to see if we get away with it and can in fact use
> this API in high-res situations later.
>

The difference to me as an implementor is that as the spec stands, I have to
choose between
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
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
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

Rob
-- 
"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]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090613/54dbfd86/attachment.htm>