Is MRI intended to be implemented only by classes that extend
java.awt.Image? I think that's the only place we look for it. If so,
then we should state that. Perhaps:
---------
This interface is designed to be an optional additional API supported by
some implementations of {java.awt.Image} to allow them to provide
alternate images for various rendering resolutions. The various
{Graphics.drawImage} variant methods will consult the methods of this
interface if it is implemented on the argument {Image} object in order
to choose the best representation to use for each rendering operation.
<p>
The {MRI} interface should be implemented by any subclass of {j.a.Image}
that ...(existing text)... given image width and height. For
convenience, toolkit images obtained from {...} will implement this
interface on platforms that support naming conventions for resolution
variants of stored image media and the {Abstract} and {Base} classes are
provided to facilitate easy construction of custom multi-resolution
images from a list of related images.
---------
Should we list the naming conventions that we support (mainly just
"@2x"?), or should that be listed in the documentation of the various
getImage() and createImage() methods?
On 8/19/15 4:51 AM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Hello,
Could you review the updated fix:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alexsch/8029339/webrev.12
- Comment about nonempty return list is added for
MultiResolutionImage.getResolutionVariants() method
That comment has a blank line. If it is supposed to be 2 paragraphs
then I think you need a <p> tag, otherwise the blank line should
probably be removed (I don't need to see a webrev for that).
The rest looks fine...
...jim
