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.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 27 July 2010 21:01:00 GMT

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