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

Re: [css3-background] box-shadow syntax

From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 13:04:22 +1000
Message-ID: <482BA836.8080806@css-class.com>
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

Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 03:05:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:36 UTC