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

Re: Implementation of Inset Box Shadow on image elements

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 12:41:14 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTik4KqAfF_D0y2p1CVY6OrJxjE_TDyQbyko_y621@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, divya manian <divya.manian@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
> On Aug 3, 2010, at 11:22 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
>>> So one thing I don't understand about this proposed use of
>>> inset shadow, illustrated at
>>> <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/952/pola/index.html>, is why the
>>> background-image is dimmed out at all.
>>>
>>> The inset shadow goes from fully opaque at the edges of the
>>> "hole", to fully transparent over most of the hole (by some
>>> distance related to the blur radius from the edge). So,
>>> outside the influence of the shadow, the background-image
>>> should be fully revealed. Why is it dimmed out?
>>
>> Because it's a different image.  The one on the left is pola.jpg, the
>> one on the right is pola-trans.jpg.
>
> I'm asking about the desired effect, not specifically how it's illustrated
> by <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/952/pola/index.html>.

Ah, kk.  The desired effect is for it to act like you assume it should
- it should go fully transparent internally.  Any further effect
should be achieved by something else, such as providing another image.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2010 19:42:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:30 GMT