On Feb 15, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 6:43 AM, Stef Epardaud
wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to write a client-side application in HTML5 that resizes
images before uploading them to the server. I saw several demos
that did
this resizing using canvas and img,
On 16 February 2010 04:44, Hugh Guiney wrote:
> While it is true that the amount of information in the SOURCE image
> does not change, the amount of information in the RESULT image *does*,
> simply by nature of the fact that it is no longer the same image.
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Come on,
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 12:35 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> ...
>
> Pixel aspect ratios.
>
> This whole discussion has been painful to watch.
I know what pixel aspect ratios are. All too well, actually—for
instance, the square-pixel equivalent of 720x480 widescreen can be
either 853x480, 854x480
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Hugh Guiney wrote:
> And when other established terms are used, like "480p"—which, in
> virtually every other context, refers to 720x480, the most common of
> the acceptable resolution for DVDs—yet the video is *854*x480, that's
> also confusing. Ted could downloa
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 8:09 PM, David Singer wrote:
> I think I agree with Tim here. When you ask to watch "360p" content, you are
> asking for content that has 360 lines of pixels to be displayed to you.
Right.
> You're not asking for whatever is displayed to you to occupy only 360 lines
>
I think I agree with Tim here. When you ask to watch "360p" content, you are
asking for content that has 360 lines of pixels to be displayed to you. You're
not asking for whatever is displayed to you to occupy only 360 lines of pixels
on your display. Yes, when it is shown larger, then filteri
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Tim Hutt wrote:
> Erm, what? The 360p refers to the 'native' resolution of the video
> file youtube sends. If you play a 360p video fullscreen, it's still
> only got 360 lines; they're just scaled up. It would be meaningless if
> the number referred to the final pl
On 15 February 2010 23:07, Hugh Guiney wrote:
> But even if we had a standard, YouTube further dilutes the meaning of
> these abbreviations since they now also have a toggle button (depicted
> as two arrows at a right angle) that expands or contracts the player
> but leaves the quality setting the
Thanks for your insight Silvia.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer
wrote:
> Firstly, I think that explicit user choice isn't a problem.
>
> As a content provider, you have several means of doing this user choice:
>
> 1) You can provide in a single (admittedly javascript-based) video
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 6:43 AM, Stef Epardaud wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to write a client-side application in HTML5 that resizes
> images before uploading them to the server. I saw several demos that did
> this resizing using canvas and img, but I have only seen how to get a
> data URL out
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 05:16:43PM +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> >You don't. The canvas is just a bitmap; it has no attached metadata.
> >
> >This could be changed, but various things would need to be defined about
> >what happens when multiple images are drawn in, when images are drawn on
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:10:30 +0100, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 2/15/10 9:43 AM, Stef Epardaud wrote:
In a related question, is there any guarantee that when we draw an image
with EXIF information into a canvas for resizing, we get (or not) the
EXIF back in the resized image (currently via toDataUR
On 2/15/10 9:43 AM, Stef Epardaud wrote:
In a related question, is there any guarantee that when we draw an image
with EXIF information into a canvas for resizing, we get (or not) the
EXIF back in the resized image (currently via toDataURL())?
You don't. The canvas is just a bitmap; it has no
Hello,
I am trying to write a client-side application in HTML5 that resizes
images before uploading them to the server. I saw several demos that did
this resizing using canvas and img, but I have only seen how to get a
data URL out of a canvas, and since Base64 is about 1.37% larger than
the equiv
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 2:29 AM, Biju wrote:
> I dont know whether you all saw list of people on
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391834
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61098
Those two address a *completely* separate issue, that of someone
running an infinite alert()
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 2:45 AM, Biju wrote:
> Also as a user I feel why cant Firefox, Safari, Opera, Chrome agree to
> behave same.
Because, before HTML5, they all had to guess at what the others were
doing. ^_^ As they all implement the HTML5 parsing algorithm, they
will act the same.
~TJ
Browsers could solve the editor use case by treating "close tab" as
"hide tab" for a minute or two before actually shutting down the page.
Then the problem becomes, how do you make it obvious to users that
they can get their work back by pressing a magic button somewhere?
The modal quit loop is f
Why cant we consider <% some text %> and as
pre-processor command node in HTML DOM.
Also as a user I feel why cant Firefox, Safari, Opera, Chrome agree to
behave same.
I dont know whether you all saw list of people on
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391834
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61098
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Biju wrote:
> What should a user agent display when html content is...
>
>
> <%@ page language="java" %>
>
>
> At present IE and Safari display blank
>
> Firefox display <%@ page language="java" %>
>
> And for document.body.innerHTML browsers give
> Firefox -->
20 matches
Mail list logo
