W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [css3-text] script-specific functionality

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:05:49 -0700
Message-ID: <4D9F4E7D.9050307@inkedblade.net>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>, HÃ¥kon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 04/08/2011 10:47 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 10:38 AM, fantasai<fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>  wrote:
>>>> I suggest we remove the 'text-outline' property -- 'text-shadow'
>>>> should cover it.
>>> I don't have answer to this question, sorry again -- fantasai?
>> I have no problem with that. It was even marked as a suggestion in the
>> draft already. ;)
> I'd disagree with this - text-shadow isn't an adequate replacement for
> a real outline/stroke.  Shadows do a half-job, but you need 4 or 8
> shadows in your code to do it, and they lose detail in a way that's
> pretty bad for some fonts.
> Brad had a really good diagram showing the distinction between shadow
> and outline, and just how much better a real outline looks in some
> situations.

The 'text-outline' property wasn't about stroking the letters. It did
exactly the same thing as spread on text shadows. Although it could be
argued that it should keep corners sharp rather than rounding them, it
doesn't encroach on the glyph face, only paints around it.

Here's an illustration of the effect:
The text outline is the white part.

The effect is especially popular in East Asia, but was originally
requested for subtitles on TV. (Providing a contrasting backdrop around
the edges of the letter makes it easier to see.)

Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 18:06:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:45 UTC