- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 13:04:22 +1000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, www-style@w3.org
fantasai wrote:
> In Brad's mockups, if the blur radius is more than zero then the gradient
> is as wide as the blur radius and is centered on the edge of the "spread".
> This means if the spread is wider than half the radius part of the shadow
> does not have a gradient.
>
> As for why not use a border for "spread" -- working around the limitations
> of existing CSS is not the point here. As Brad said, you might want to have
> both a border and a shadow.
>
> ~fantasai
Well there can be both, spread by spread and by border showing
definition (sharpness). Brad's inner shadow/glow and spread requires a
transparent border-box where the shadow/glow shows through.
Also the blur can either represent a convex or concave [1] curve.
Type | Inside border | Outside border |
---------------------------------------------------------
shadow | blur~sharp (concave) | sharp~blur (convex) |
---------------------------------------------------------
highlight | blur~sharp (concave) | sharp~blur (convex) |
---------------------------------------------------------
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convex_and_Concave
Alan
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 03:05:27 UTC