On Feb 1, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Brad Kemper wrote: > > On Feb 1, 2009, at 10:50 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 6:53 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net >> > wrote: >> Robert O'Callahan wrote: >> >> So you're saying that in my testcase, the shadow of the first box >> of the span should disappear, since it's to the right of that box's >> right border edge, but the shadow of the second box of the span >> should be drawn in its entirety? >> >> No, the shadow of the first box should be drawn except on the >> (broken) >> left side, and the shadow of the second box should be drawn except >> on the (broken) right side. >> >> Like this: >> >> +------- >> | >> +------- >> ###### >> >> ---------+ >> |# >> ---------+# >> ########### >> >> You seem to have missed that the horizontal shadow offset in my >> example causes the box-shadow to not intersect the border-box. >> >> Rob > > You're right. Because the right side border and padding are > suppressed (because they appears on the next line), so should all of > the shadow that extends beyond that edge, which in your example is > the entire shadow. And likewise, because that part of the shadow > (the whole thing) is missing from the first line, it should be there > in the second line. Thus, the entire shadow should appear on the > second line in this example. > > Webkit and FireFox/Minefield don't do that yet. > A test case and bugs filed in our respective databases would be helpful here. :) dave
Received on Sunday, 1 February 2009 21:54:42 UTC