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

Re: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2009-02-04: box-shadow and border-image

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:12:13 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0902121212t3572b516t2f7e82af46809d84@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, robert@ocallahan.org, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
> So here is how I would rate the choices:
> 1/2 star: drawing a box-shadow that follows border lines/curves that you
> don't even plan to display
> 4 stars: box-shadow used the border-image as a mask (if the issue of
> transparency can be dealt with in a fairly reasonable way)
> 5 stars: let the artist creating the raster border images also create the
> raster shadows, and suppress the border-box-following box-shadow in the same
> way that the padding-box-following borders are suppressed.

I'm with David, and would rate using border-image as a mask on
box-shadow higher.

The reasons you've provided against this are at this point *so* niche
that I'm comfortable dropping fallback support in those cases in favor
of making the common cases better.

Received on Thursday, 12 February 2009 20:12:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:24 UTC