I think text-shadow and box-shadow have not the same purpose.
While text-shadow must be simple because we don't need something complex, the box-shadow property must respond to a developer's need that's continuously more complex.
CSS must evolve with the developer's needs and not be solidified and immutable.
The actual evolution of all the documents formats is:
- Transitions (between states, between pages ...)
- Image and box effects (border, shadows ...)
- Open and free format
- Interoperability between formats
I think CSS should follow the same way.
In addition, I think it's possible to use a similar syntax for the two, by adding only some "optional" parameters to the property.
Fremy
--------------------------------------------------
From: "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 9:37 PM
To: "Francois Remy" <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
Cc: "CSS 3 W3C Group" <www-style@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Fw: Box-shadow : Why not follow the standardized OpenXML
specification ?
>
> Francois Remy wrote:
>>
>> Box-shadow : Why not follow the standardized OpenXML specification ?
>
> Because we have had a 'text-shadow' property since 1998 and
> any syntax we choose for 'box-shadow' should be consistent
> with that.
>
> ~fantasai
>
