W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2009

Re: [css3-background] box-shadow and border-break

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:01:56 -0800
Cc: "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <6E8A0E77-BD84-44A2-85E3-B9E4BD6AEEB0@gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

On Feb 2, 2009, at 11:36 PM, fantasai wrote:

> Brad Kemper wrote:
>> I think that is much better; thank you. Just a couple small points:
>> 1. With box-shadow's 'inset', the part about it not being drawn  
>> outside
>> the broken edge is not quite right. It should not be drawn along that
>> edge if it is an inner shadow either.
> Changed "outside" to "at".
>> 2 should 'some other border style' be 'some other border  
>> properties'? Or
>> is it OK to use 'border style' in a more general sense like that?
> It's meant in a very specific sense, actually. Setting the color
> and the width but leaving the style as 'none' still results in
> no border or padding.

Ah, I see. You're right. That makes complete sense.

>> 3 That part mentions shadow and border image, so it should also  
>> mention
>> border-radius (apply to box as whole).
> Updated. Take a look?
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-background/#the-border-break

Very good.

If I were being picky, I'd change "has no effect at its corners" to  
"has no effect at the corners of that edge", for extra clarity of the  
"it", but that's your call.
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2009 16:02:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:23 UTC