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

Re: [css3-background] Where we are with Blur value discussion

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 15:04:03 -0700
Message-Id: <6C73469B-B6E8-4A6B-9B53-DD88A2BF2636@gmail.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
On Jul 17, 2010, at 1:22 PM, Brian Months <brianman@microsoft.com> wrote:

> s it also required that the algorithm be symmetric?  

I don't think so. In current implementations, a blur between opaque and transparent does seem to have 50% in the middle (where the unblurred edge would be), more opaque pixels on one side and all more transparent pixels on the other. But that might not be the case once the tangle of opacities is clamped to no less than 1% opaciyi and no more than 99% opacity, extending across the entire (measured) blur region. 

> Must the rates of change be consistent in the X and Y dimensions?

That seems like a reasonable requirement. 

> Further, is it required the algorithm be consistent in the positive and negative directions.  

I don't think so. 

> If I put two boxes next to each other horizontally that use the same blur, should they produce a consistent effect on the underlying background along the linear part of the shared left/right border (because combine they provide a consistent opa

I'm pretty sure I don't understand. 
Received on Saturday, 17 July 2010 22:05:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:29 GMT