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

RE: [css3-background] Default shadow color

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 02:16:05 +0000
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FA122FEC823D524CB516E4E0374D9DCF16D3095A@TK5EX14MBXC138.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Perhaps I was confused by the title of the mail but...

> >> Ok, if we have interop on currentColor, we can update the spec that way.
> >> I'm kindof surprised, because if you do that for text-shadows, it's
> >> really almost never the right color.
> >>
> >> ~fantasai
> >
> > You've said this twice now, but I'm curious to here why or at least in what
> way it's "wrong".
> 
> It's hard to imagine many wanting their text-shadow to be the color of their
> text, as that would usually make the text unreadable. If text-shadow had
> spread it might be useful for creating a pseudo-bold, I suppose, but that
> would be too hacky for us to encourage in the absence of existing usage.

I thought we were -- at least initially -- talking about box-shadow.

If the only reason to consider currentColor as "wrong" is because "text-shadow might look bad", then it should really be a text-shadow tweak (like the no-inset thing) rather than a box-shadow UA-defined shenanigan.

Or am I missing something?

- Brian
Received on Friday, 4 March 2011 02:17:46 GMT

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