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: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:17:46 -0500
Message-ID: <7c2a12e20902171517w36321a2cyfcd4612dcf6b12de@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 2:51 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>>                     ______
>>                    /      \
>>                   /        \
>>                  /    /\    \
>>                 /    /  \    \
>
> Huh.  Yeah, you're right.  Don't know why I didn't see that
> immediately.  And since applying a manhattan distance metric really
> *is* just like tracing it with a square brush, this is exactly what
> would result.

Are you certain about that?  It seems to me that you'd have to trace
with a diamond shape (centered around the edge of the figure you're
tracing) to get Manhattan distance.  The curve formed by remaining
within a fixed Manhattan distance of a given point (a Manhattan
circle) is certainly a diamond shape, not a square.  In the diagram
given, the pointy thing would remain pointy.

However, I believe the corners of a square would get flattened, by the
same logic.  So even if I'm right, Manhattan distance isn't going to
preserve sharp edges.
Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2009 23:18:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:16 GMT