W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2010

Re: [css3-background] box-shadow spread radius and rounded corners

From: Alex Meiburg <timeroot.alex@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 17:00:10 -0700
Message-ID: <x2u736b692e1004291700w32a53b16s60fc245130a846db@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
This makes it even worse, I feel. It's not an ellipse or a circle. It's
something else, construed only from unusual rules. The only reason people
haven't be arguing about blurs (I think someone already said this) is
because they're largely up to the user agent. That doesn't mean they won't
suffer from the same problems. I think anything that's decided for the
spread should immediately be applied to the shadow as well, just because it
isn't doesn't mean the spread should do what the shadow does.

~6 out of 5 statisticians say that the number of statistics that either make
no sense or use ridiculous timescales at all has dropped over 164% in the
last 5.62474396842 years.

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Apr 28, 2010, at 6:40 PM, Alex Meiburg wrote:
>
> > Then, the shadow would add something like 5px to each radius
>
> No, it just follows the radius in the same way that it follows the straight
> parts. So does the blur, for that matter. For instance, take a look at this,
> where you can see the difference between a sharp corner and a heavily
> blurred one (no spread in either):
>
> http://www.bradclicks.com/cssplay/Blur-vs-Corner.html
>
> Now look at this image, where the white has been changed to yellow, so that
> you can clearly see the extent of the blurred area:
>
> http://www.bradclicks.com/cssplay/Blur-vs-Corner_result.png
>
> This shows that the blur area has extended the boundary of the shadow out
> 25px, and created a shape with a 50px corner radius! Yet no one is
> complaining about how it increases the radius from 0 to 50px. This is the
> same sort of thing that spread does, but with a solid colored brush instead
> of a fuzzy-edged brush. In fact it is what 'border' does too, but no one
> complains about it having inner radii that are different from the outer
> radii. Border is more like inner shadow, in that the radius of the inner
> part gets smaller than the specified part, but that's just because the spec
> says to apply the radius to the outside of the border instead of the inside.
> It could just as easily have gone the other way.
Received on Friday, 30 April 2010 00:00:44 GMT

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