[css-images-3] Is "image-rendering: crisp-edges" still worthwhile to keep separate?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Bikeshed
- Stars
- 4.9k
- Forks
- 816
- PR merge metrics
- PR metrics pending
Description
Currently, image-rendering: crisp-edges is defined somewhat abstractly to just be:
The image must be scaled with an algorithm that preserves contrast and edges in the image,
and which does not smooth colors or introduce blur to the image in the process.
This is intended for images such as pixel art or line drawings.
It's allowed for this to just be identical to pixelated, but it can use more advanced upscaling algorithms if desired, like hq2x (I have no idea what the state of the art here is).
Is there any actual interest in making this do something different from pixelated? Or should I just fold it in as a legacy alias, like the older SVG keywords?
/cc @dholbert especially
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the CSS Images 3 definition of image-rendering, especially the crisp-edges and pixelated keywords. Compare their intended behavior and existing SVG keywords, then determine whether a distinct algorithm is needed or whether crisp-edges should become a legacy alias; completion requires a resolved specification direction.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- css
- Domain
- documentation, web-dev
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100