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

Re: Implementation of Inset Box Shadow on image elements

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:00:07 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=DJAWwHjsCK6P6GLJHWMH=jz-LOJZTP4cAqAoJ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
Cc: 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, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net> wrote:
> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:35 PM, fantasai
>> <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>>> As I mentioned, it should be painted immediately below z-index: 1,
>>> so that authors can pop things out of the shadow with 'z-index'.
>> What would happen if both a parent and a child specified an inset
>> shadow?  Which paints on top of which?
>> (Presumably the parent's shadow would paint atop the child's shadow.)
> That would be a change from the usual approach taken in the stacking
> model, where document tree order is king when all else is equal.

Agreed, but it would match the physical intuition for how inset shadows work.

Received on Tuesday, 27 July 2010 21:01:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:34:39 UTC