W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2007

Re: [css3-background] CSS Drop Shadows

From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:31:55 -0600
To: John Oyler <johnoyler.css@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-id: <BBA4FC61-9FDE-4FD9-A45C-A929EECDDFF5@apple.com>

I don't think they imply that necessarily.  For example, border-radius  
can't be used in the border shorthand.

dave

On Dec 19, 2007, at 12:18 PM, John Oyler wrote:

>
> On Dec 19, 2007, at 1:12 PM, David Hyatt wrote:
>
>> Text-shadow is shadowing some actual drawing.  Box-shadow, though,  
>> is just a decorative effect around the edges of a box.  I don't  
>> think they are that similar (other than syntactically).
>>
>> Possible new properties that would shadow actual drawing and that  
>> would behave more like text-shadow include:
>> 	shadow - Shadow all drawing done by the object and its descendants.
>> 	border-shadow - Shadow actual border drawing (would get messy at  
>> border corners just as RGBA overlap does)
>> 	background-shadow - Shadow actual background drawing (this would  
>> do more what you want with a partially transparent background for  
>> example, since the shadow would show through the transparency)
>>
>
> Of these, "shadow" seems to be the least problematic property name.  
> The other two imply that you could include the shadow's values in a  
> plain "background" or "border" and expect it to work. I'm not sure  
> that's possible, wouldn't the parser hiccup when seeing another  
> color value, or a pair of unit values? Is there some way to delimit  
> it that I'm not aware of, that could make it non-ambiguous? Or would  
> you just not have them as part of plain border/background?
>
>>
>
> John Oyler
> john@discrevolt.com
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2007 19:32:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:57 GMT