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

Re: [css3-background] proposed box-shadow syntax

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 09:47:56 -0700
Message-ID: <482874BC.3000009@inkedblade.net>
To: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
CC: Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>, Eli Morris-Heft <dai@doublefishstudios.com>, "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>

Alan Gresley wrote:
> 
> Now I know that my CSS wouldn't work since the spread would be '0'
> 
> 
> I getting confused since I can find this from the 3rd Dec 2007.
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css3-background/Overview.html?rev=1.9
> 
> 
> Which has only 'background-shadow' and 'border-shadow' and the latest 
> from the 4th Apr 2008.
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css3-background/Overview.html?rev=1.20
> 
> 
> Which only has box-shadow??????
> 
> 
> So part of my argument is based on shifting ground. :-/

It's an editor's draft. It's effectively a mirror of the editors' local
disk copy. It hasn't been reviewed by the WG as a whole. It changes a
lot in response to ideas and feedback. In this case it changed in response
to some feedback, and changed back in response to other feedback. We made
it public so you can see spec changes as soon as they happen. If you want
something more stable, you can check out the latest /official/ Working
Draft.
   http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/
If you want the latest-latest, dev.w3.org is the "bleeding edge".

~fantasai
Received on Monday, 12 May 2008 16:48:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:06 GMT