W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: Updated to the blending and compositing spec (was: minutes, December 10 2012, FXTF telcon)

From: Lea Verou <lea@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 00:48:41 +0200
Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, public-fx@w3.org
Message-Id: <C5E527F5-F4EC-44BA-9F7E-8DA7DAFB200B@w3.org>
To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
On Dec 12, 2012, at 00:40, Rik Cabanier wrote:

> Hi Lea,
> 
> thanks for the clarification!
>  
> I don't particularly like that this forces you to always specify what part of the element you want to blend.
> Most likely, 99% of blending will just target the element and now those users will have to write either 2 css properties or put 'element' in the shorthand.

It doesn’t :) `element` would just be the initial value for `mix-blend-area`, just like `normal` is for `mix-blend-mode`. I guess I should’ve mentioned that, but I assumed it was obvious. Mea culpa. :)

> 
> How about we drop the '-area' property and assume in the shorthand that no area means that that blend should apply to the whole element?
> So your case becomes:
> mix-blend: screen, multiply box-shadow, multiply text-shadow;

Sounds like what I’m saying, without the longhands. The benefit of having the longhands is potential shorter code when you want the same blending mode to apply to multiple areas (check my example) and individual setting of the two components (area and blending mode), both of which are relatively rare I guess. The downside is more properties. No strong opinions here...

Cheers,
Lea
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 22:48:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 December 2012 22:48:54 GMT