To the extent possible under law, the editors have waived all copyright
and related or neighboring rights to this work.
In addition, as of 1 January 1970,
the editors have made this specification available under the Open Web Foundation Agreement Version 1.0,
which is available at http://www.openwebfoundation.org/legal/the-owf-1-0-agreements/owfa-1-0.
Parts of this work may be from another specification document. If so, those parts are instead covered by the license of that specification document.
Abstract
[ABSTRACT]
Draft: https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/CR-css-paint-api-1-20180809/
Title: CSS Painting API Level 1
Issue 3.
Summary: Typo: use snappedConcreteObjectSize in paint callback
From: Chris Harrelson
Comment: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/800
Changes: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/commit/735ea42edf09f8d69de1eddbc7e7691528f56963
Closed: Accepted
Resolved: Editorial
Issue 4.
Summary: Disconnect between css-paint-api-1 and HTML specs on CanvasImageSource
From: Alan Jeffrey
Comment: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/819
Response: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/819#issuecomment-424360647
Open: Waiting for HTML spec edits
Issue 5.
Summary: Improve passing of large-scale data to PaintWorklet
From: John Wiesz
Comment: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/872
Response: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/872#issuecomment-499903766
Open: Waiting on edits to add new features to Properties an Values API
Issue 6.
Summary: Cycle possibe using inputProperties()
From: Stephen McGruer
Comment: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/877
Response: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/877#issuecomment-499922873
Open: Needs Edits
Issue 7.
Summary: Two-way communication between main thread and worklet
From: Samad Aghaei
Comment: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/881
Response: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/881#issuecomment-546456591
Closed: OutOfScope
Conformance
Conformance requirements are expressed with a combination of descriptive assertions and RFC 2119 terminology.
The key words “MUST”, “MUST NOT”, “REQUIRED”, “SHALL”, “SHALL NOT”, “SHOULD”, “SHOULD NOT”, “RECOMMENDED”, “MAY”, and “OPTIONAL”
in the normative parts of this document
are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
However, for readability,
these words do not appear in all uppercase letters in this specification.
All of the text of this specification is normative
except sections explicitly marked as non-normative, examples, and notes. [RFC2119]
Examples in this specification are introduced with the words “for example”
or are set apart from the normative text with class="example", like this:
This is an example of an informative example.
Informative notes begin with the word “Note”
and are set apart from the normative text with class="note", like this: