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

RE: Possible text-shadow enhancements

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 02:57:38 +0000
To: Xaxio Brandish <xaxiobrandish@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Message-ID: <FA122FEC823D524CB516E4E0374D9DCF16D31CA2@TK5EX14MBXC138.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
css3-text is probably missing this line:
All properties defined in this specification also accept the inherit<http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/cascade.html#value-def-inherit> keyword as their property value, but for readability it has not been listed explicitly.

[from http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-background/#values]

-Brian

From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Xaxio Brandish
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 6:13 PM
To: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: Possible text-shadow enhancements

Good afternoon,

As long as we're talking about text-shadow enhancements...

In CSS 2, text-shadow is present as part of the recommendation, and supports the value 'inherit', but it was not inherited by default. [1]

CSS 2.1 doesn't mention text-shadow at all (it was removed to be put in CSS 3?) [2]

In CSS 3, 'inherit' is not present as a value, but it is inherited by default. [3]

My question is, should the 'inherit' value be present?  I think it could be useful for forced-perspective styles that change based on interaction or for effect.  Also, it seems that Opera, Firefox, and Chrome treat it as if it's a valid value? [4]

--Xaxio

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-19980512/text.html#text-shadow-props

[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html

[3] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text/#text-shadow

[4] http://xaxio.com/style/text-shadow-inherit-001.xht

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com<mailto:brad.kemper@gmail.com>> wrote:


On Mar 4, 2011, at 3:11 PM, Jordan OSETE <jordan.osete@gmail.com<mailto:jordan.osete@gmail.com>> wrote:

> Also, I ran into a little spec-related issue: as text-shadow allows
> multiple shadows (unlike box shadow), should we allow a different
> inset status for each shadow ? And if we do, how do we handle cases
> where inset and normal shadows are stacked one above another ? Should
> we "force" all inset shadows to be defined before normal ones, and
> throw a syntax error else ?
Box-shadow also allows multiple shadows. Insets are all above the background and others are all below the background, even if they are interleaved in the value list.

Received on Saturday, 5 March 2011 02:58:13 GMT

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