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

Re: [css3-background] vastly different takes on "blur"

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:17:35 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTik4fAij0YtzJoNIVFbXTK0cRm-oRIt8wUhcZWfh@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>
Cc: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Just to be clear, aren't the mockups for each option going to be the
>> same thing? For instance, wouldn't Simon's example
>>
>> http://smfr.org/misc/shadow.html
>>
>> just be accompanied by the question
>>
>> "Would you describe this as 'blur: 8px' or 'blur: 16px'?"
>>
>> ?
>
> or, as a better example
> http://smfr.org/misc/shadow-webkit.png
> so browser differences don't confuse things.
>

Indeed, PNGs are necessary, since in Chrome I'm seeing that as
something that could be described as either 4px or 8px, not 8px or
16px.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2010 18:18:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:28 GMT