Hi! > > An orthogonal issue is labeling all of those regions. I think we should > > start with fully obscured areas and maybe less readable ones like the > > waterfall edges. Still, different features should live on different > > masks – even if we don't attach meaningfull labels (like 'notch' or > > 'camera cutout') to them right away. > > > > > > What do you all think of that? I didn't see this approach considered in > > any of the earlier discussions, yet it seems so elegant to me. Am I > > missing something? > > I think the unfortunate truth is that approximating notches and rounded > corners exclusively with regular arcs at the cost of pixel accuracy is > just such a no-brainer. Pixel masks would be pixel accurate, but there > is no benefit compared to a slightly underfit curve.
Pixel accuracy may be important for low-resolution displays.
And... I have certain low-resolution displays in mind. There are
keyboards with individual backlights below each key.
Maybe they could/should be treated similarily to displays with
occlusions? But we'll really need to be pixel-perfect for that.
Best regards,
Pavel
--
People of Russia, stop Putin before his war on Ukraine escalates.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
