Re: Possible text-shadow enhancements

*Very nice examples!*

I agree that the definition of textshadow is currently quite weak.
It would be very nice if it would become more versatile.

Just want to give an argument for also keeping Text-shadow since I found
this note.

The spread radius argument added to the
‘text-shadow<http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-text/#text-shadow0>’
property makes this property somewhat redundant. Should it be kept?
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-text/#text-outline0

Even if text-shadow would be improved to enable a spread radius and mulitple
shades/colors.
I think it is very important that text-border is not removed.

*Reason*
One very common effekt on logos/text is to have both an outline and a
dropshadow  with a diagonal offset.
This would not be possible if the text-border was removed.
Unless you could offset different areas of text-shadow attribute, but that
sound like a tedious solution to me.


Regards,

Gabriel Zackari


On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Jordan OSETE <jordan.osete@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello everybody,
>
> This is actually a follow-up to an old proposal written a few years ago:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Oct/0266.html
>
> In short, the proposal was to improve text-shadow in two simple ways:
> - add an optional spread radius, to replace text-outline, and allow a
> wider range of effects
> - text-shadow could accept the foreground color, to avoid the
> unreadable text issue in case the user agent does not support the
> property (for graceful degradation):
>  text-shadow: [fgColor,]? shadow [, shadow ... ];
>
> I have written a simple mock-up of what is possible with the HTML5
> canvas tag, as well as a few (basic) examples here:
> http://www.fruitsofts.com/testcases/canvas_text-shadow.htm
>
> Regards,
>
> Jordan Osete
>
>