W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: Updated Filters 1.0 editor's draft

From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:56:26 +1000
Cc: public-fx@w3.org
Message-id: <46105C79-6DAC-49A6-9EC6-2C95336D7599@apple.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>

On 31/08/2011, at 5:40 AM, Dean Jackson wrote:

> On 31/08/2011, at 2:17 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:
>>> - Added drop-shadow shorthand
>> Elika and I have been advocating an approach for functions where, when
>> possible, the contents are just normal CSS values.  Explicit
>> comma-separated argument lists should only be used when necessary for
>> disambiguation.  In particular, this would mean that blur() can
>> probably drop the commas and just accept one or two space-separated
>> lengths, and drop-shadow() can drop the commas and just use <shadow>,
>> perhaps with a restriction that you can't provide the 'input' keyword
>> (text-shadow does this).  Gamma and unsharp can potentially drop the
>> commas as well.
> Sure. I'll make those changes.

Done now. You meant the 'inset' keyword.

I've removed all the commas - I don't think we'll need disambiguation. I
should actually write grammar for the property values in a future update.

>> As a sidenote, while I understand the historic reasoning behind the
>> name of the unsharp() function, it's really super-confusing to have
>> something that sharpens an image be named "unsharp".  Could we change
>> this to just "sharpen" or something?
> Yes, I think that makes sense too.

Renamed to "sharpen".


Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2011 00:56:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 22 June 2015 03:33:46 UTC