W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

RE: [css3-text] Should text-shadow have 'spread'?

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 03:41:57 +0000
To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3C4041FF83E1E04A986B6DC50F0178290341B0B2@TK5EX14MBXC295.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

[Brian Manthos:] 
>  [fantasai:]
> > Also, the CSS2.0 version
> Well, if we're going to go back to the CSS2.0 version then this should be
> restored as well...
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-CSS2-20080411/text.html#text-shadow-props
> # If no color is specified, the value of the 'color' property will be used
> instead.
> Further, if we want text-shadow and box-shadow to converge (where
> reasonable) rather than diverge then box-shadow should be changed from...
> # omitted colors are a UA-chosen color.
> In short, both text-shadow and box-shadow should specify currentColor
> style behavior for absent <color> parameters if we're concerned with CSS
> 2.0 compatibility and want consistency for common parameters between box
> and text shadow.

I suspect the suggestion here is to align text-shadow with its original
2.0 incarnation, not to align box-shadow and text-shadow.

Another option is to push a simplified L3 Text forward including the 2.0
text-shadow and initiate an L4 with lots of new text-* features, including
text-shadow extensions ?
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 03:42:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:54 UTC