W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2008

Fwd: Box-shadow : Why not follow the standardized OpenXML specification ?

From: Henrik Hansen <henrikb4@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:12:13 +0200
Message-ID: <dd12cf660806180512t33f5a04fj17a438461ed7b02f@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

Brad Kemper wrote:
> I'm not against the idea of a tilted shadow, but it seems like overkill and
> overloading for the drop shadow effects we have in text-shadow and box
> shadow. Maybe that could be its own property, if there is demand for it.
> Also, it is a much more illustrative, rather than decorative, effect, so
> perhaps is better for SVG.

I agree in that, special effects like tilted and scaling shadows
should be reserved for SVG and/or <canvas>.

But on the inner and outer shadow topic: I can see absolutely none use
for both an inner and outer shadow. Why is not the question! How would
you think it would work logically? An object that is both carved into
the plane it's levitating over.
We should stick to a simple syntax like this: box-shadow: <offset-x>
<offset-y> <blur-radius> <outer I inner>;

Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2008 12:12:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:37 UTC