<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
" The colorspace of the selection of these device should be represented for a user as a grayscale image. For example: black pixel means the mask in completely transparent, white pixel means -- completely opaque."<br>
<br>
But does transparent means "selected" or does opaque means "selected"?<br></blockquote><div><br>We can define any. But it would be better if we followed the way other editors do it.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
" Selection tools should have access to global selection only. They should *not* affect the selection of the mask in any way. When a user uses a selection tool on a selection based layer it just creates the global selection only. This created selection may be used to fill the area with a solid "transparency color" or just limit painting with a usual brush. "<br>
<br>
So for working on a mask or a layer with an associated selection (like filter layer), the user should use the ordinary painting tools, right? And using a selection should select the mask and make it possible to cut, transform etc?<br>
</blockquote><div><br>Yes, we should use ordinary tools. Selection tools will just add a global selection, not affecting layer's one in any way. This global selection will just affect the ordinary tools with which you paint on this mask.<br>
</div></div><br>-- <br>Dmitry Kazakov<br>