- From: Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 10:33:07 -0500
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: robert@ocallahan.org, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Interesting. I'm really not seeing that. Check out this test case, frex: >>> >>> <!DOCTYPE html> >>> <body style="font-size: 1000px; text-shadow: 0 0 100px black; color: >>> white; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"> >>> f >>> <div style="background: red; width: 100px; height: 3px; position: >>> absolute; top: 700px; left: 183px;"></div> >>> >>> (You may have to adjust the "left" on the <div>.) >>> >>> It seems very clear from a visual inspection that the blur only >>> extends outward roughly 50px. This effect occurs on both my Windows >>> and Linux machines. >> >> >> With that testcase, there's a 79 pixel-wide shadow of >> not-completely-transparent pixels on both my Mac and Linux trunk builds. >> Certainly some of those pixels are not apparent to the naked eye :-) ... a >> screen magnifier that displays the actual color values of selected pixels is >> useful. > > Oh, jeez. I was looking at webkit's rendering twice, rather than > looking at webkit and then firefox. I feel silly. You're correct - > for a 100px blur, the shadow extends outward 79px. > > That still doesn't explain Simon's statement that the blur extends > outward by the full blur length. I continue to measure a nearly > perfect half-blur-length of shadow extending from the main shadow body > in Chrome, whether the blur is 8px or 100px. > > ~TJ > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Jun/0563.html =) looks like Safari and Chrome handle the argument differently.
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2010 15:33:40 UTC