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

Re: Possible text-shadow enhancements

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 22:31:37 -0800
Cc: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Jordan OSETE <jordan.osete@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <95850B3B-D71B-47D6-8C5B-2E0B1AFA0902@gmail.com>
To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>

On Mar 1, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Brian Manthos wrote:

>> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On
>> Behalf Of Simon Fraser
>> The problem with spread radius, which we already discussed in the context
>> of box-shadow, is whether it makes sharp corners rounded. This is especially
>> problematic with border-radius, because you have a potential discontinuity
>> between zero border radius causing spread to retain sharp corners, and a any
>> small, but non-zero radius resulting in in a shadow with obviously rounded
>> corners.
>> 
>> I think people will be more sensitive to this in the context of text, and that
>> text stroke gives a more predictable visual result.
> 
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text/
> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-text/#text-shadow
> 
> These two drafts agree: "<shadow> is the same as defined for the ‘box-shadow’ property except that the ‘inset’ keyword is not allowed."

I don't see any good reason to disallow inset shadows. I think you can create some nice effects with those:

http://www.bradclicks.com/cssplay/hello.png

The bottom example has 3 inset shadows and one outer. The top one has one inset and one outer.
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2011 06:32:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:38 GMT