Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-backgrounds] The shape of box-shadow should be a circle for a box with border-radius:50% and big spread (#7103)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-backgrounds] The shape of box-shadow should be a circle for a box with border-radius:50% and big spread`.

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;emilio> oriol: IIRC we had a webpage where you could test the various algorithms<br>
&lt;fantasai> -> https://yarusome.github.io/box-shadow-proposal/<br>
&lt;oriol> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-backgrounds-3/radius-expansion.html<br>
&lt;emilio> oriol: summary, when going inwards with border-radius you can just reduce the amount of radius<br>
&lt;emilio> ... but when going outwards if we just add the spread-distance then we break border-radius: 0<br>
&lt;emilio> ... browsers checked if border-radius is zero, but that's not great because it's not continuous<br>
&lt;emilio> ... spec tries to use a cubic formula that keeps being zero if it was zero but that has an issue but that deforms the inner shape with circles etc<br>
&lt;emilio> ... we had various ideas for ways to try to approach these<br>
&lt;emilio> ... one of the ideas was to try to keep percentages<br>
&lt;emilio> ... so we'd express the border radius as percentages and apply it to the inner and outer box<br>
&lt;emilio> ... but that doesn't work if the aspect ratio of the inner and outer didn't match<br>
&lt;astearns> two more options added from the latest comment: https://yarusome.github.io/box-shadow-proposal/<br>
&lt;emilio> ... then fantasai proposed an interpolation between the two<br>
&lt;emilio> ... I found some cases when this was not behaving that welll<br>
&lt;emilio> ... I proposed a modification to the current spec but with the addition of another factor<br>
&lt;astearns> s/two more/three more<br>
&lt;emilio> ... that also considers the ratio of the element size that's covered by the radius<br>
&lt;emilio> ... so if the horiz radius is >50% of the width of the element then we want this factor to be 1<br>
&lt;emilio> ... even if the spread is much bigger than the radius<br>
&lt;emilio> ... you can see the test-case, it seems it was better in some cases<br>
&lt;emilio> ... then someone else (yarusome) proposed some other ideas<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q?<br>
&lt;emilio> ... not sure if we should try with a whiteboard or some brainstorming to try to come up with a solution<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack oriol<br>
&lt;emilio> ... short version is take a look at the test-case<br>
&lt;emilio> ... I don't think we have the right answer yet<br>
&lt;emilio> ... someone added more funny cases<br>
&lt;fantasai> scribenick: fantasai<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7103#issuecomment-1642574924 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 19 July 2023 18:40:26 UTC