This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 12520 - Why the word dirty for the arguments to putImageData? Normally, dirty refers to something that has changed, and I think that connotation infers that the rectangle may not be copied if it hasn't changed. However, that is not the case, as far as I can tell
Summary: Why the word dirty for the arguments to putImageData? Normally, dirty refers ...
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: LC1 HTML Canvas 2D Context (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-04-18 15:22 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2011-08-04 05:03 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2011-04-18 15:22:31 UTC 
Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-canvas-element.html
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html#pixel-manipulation

Comment:
Why the word dirty for the arguments to putImageData? Normally, dirty refers
to something that has changed, and I think that connotation infers that the
rectangle may not be copied if it hasn't changed. However, that is not the
case, as far as I can tell the rectangle is simply the source rectangle inside
the image. If that's the case, why not just name the variables sx, sy, sw, and
sh, which both avoids the confusing dirty connotation, and is consistent with
the other methods in CanvasRenderingContext2D?

Posted from: 184.96.136.128 by sabreware@gmail.com
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_4) AppleWebKit/534.29 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.733.0 Safari/534.29
Comment 1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-06-21 06:28:54 UTC 
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: The idea is you're telling the browser what parts have changed, so that the browser knows which parts to copy.
Comment 2 Michael[tm] Smith 2011-08-04 05:03:19 UTC 
mass-move component to LC1