- From: Henrik Hansen <henrikb4@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 10:54:07 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
Francois Remy wrote: > 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 Text-shadow and box-shadow are quite similar i both function and syntax. We've already discussed how we could improve the functionality of box-shadow, but of course new features are welcome. But why follow a new standard (like openXML or ODF) if we already have an older standard that is already in use? Shouldn't OOXML and ODF make standards that look like them? 'cause according to you the new standards should reflect the older. -Henrik Enggaard Hansen
Received on Sunday, 15 June 2008 08:54:44 UTC