9846 2010-06-03 20:50:31 +0000 Lighter is here, but what about darker which is supported by most browsers? 2010-10-05 12:59:06 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG pre-LC1 HTML Canvas 2D Context (editor: Ian Hickson) unspecified Other other RESOLVED WORKSFORME http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#gcop-lighter P3 normal --- 1 contributor ian chrilith excors mike Ms2ger public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 35949 0 contributor 2010-06-03 20:50:31 +0000 Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html#gcop-lighter Comment: Lighter is here, but what about darker which is supported by most browsers? Posted from: 82.231.169.179 35998 1 Ms2ger 2010-06-06 12:01:37 +0000 Removed here: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-May/011335.html>. Gecko also supports "clear" and "over" (synonym of "source-over"). Ref <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-April/010735.html> <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-June/012063.html> 35999 2 chrilith 2010-06-06 13:00:34 +0000 Ok thank you for the info. 36000 3 Ms2ger 2010-06-06 13:29:11 +0000 I'd still like it specified, though. The lack of interoperability now isn't a reason not to improve the situation. 36001 4 excors 2010-06-06 13:43:17 +0000 Given the (at least) three different behaviours that have been implemented for "darker" (http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-March/010608.html), what behaviour do you want to be specified? 36004 5 Ms2ger 2010-06-06 15:02:39 +0000 (In reply to comment #4) > Given the (at least) three different behaviours that have been implemented for > "darker" > (http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-March/010608.html), > what behaviour do you want to be specified? Any, if it's implementable across platforms. I'd be fine with dropping support in browsers, but as that hasn't happened since you proposed to drop it 3 years ago, it doesn't look like that will happen. 36118 6 excors 2010-06-11 16:37:05 +0000 I guess the question is whether they've kept support because they need to maintain compatibility with content (though presumably the content's compatibility requirements aren't too strict given that the browsers all handle it differently today), in which case the spec should spec it, or whether it's because they don't care about it and it's a very low priority to spend any effort on, in which case it will be easier to achieve interoperability by having them remove the feature than by having them spend much more effort implementing a specific behaviour for it. 36119 7 Ms2ger 2010-06-11 17:41:29 +0000 Perhaps. I filed a bug on Mozilla: <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=571532>. 37317 8 Ms2ger 2010-08-09 19:39:39 +0000 And fixed it. 37318 9 Ms2ger 2010-08-09 19:45:57 +0000 And filed a bug on WebKit as well: <https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43739>.