Re: box-shadow and features (was [css3-background] Issues and Proposed Resolutions)

fantasai wrote:
> Alan Gresley wrote:
>>> Inner Box Shadow:
>>> ISSUE-44
>>>   There have been quite a few comments about adding such a feature,
>>>   or at least an "inner glow" feature (which this would address).
>> If an inner glow/shadow is added (ISSUE-44) to CSS3, the only place 
>> for the inner (whatever?) to be placed is inside the border-box. This 
>> box would have to have a transparent background but this could not 
>> happen if shadows were not allowed to be drawn inside the border-box 
>> (ISSUE-32).
> If an inner glow/shadow were added, then it would be painted inside the
> padding box and not outside it. This is analogous to the way the outer
> shadow is painted outside the border box and not inside it. :)

Well doesn't that mean the inner glow/shadow is painted above the 
background instead of how box-shadow works normally? :-)

>> Why can't box-shadow be painted the same way as shadows or highlight 
>> occur naturally. How are authors suppose to create depth of field if 
>> box-shadow doesn't work like true shadows or highlights?
> It seems more common to mask the shadow than to not mask it. Also, if
> a true shadow is wanted then it would make more sense to apply the
> effect to the whole element the same way 'opacity' works. That would
> be a different property.

Firstly you can mask the box by giving the box an opaque background, 
like blue. Opacity doesn't just effect the box but the contents of the 
box like text and what happen with the stacking order and z-index?

>> How can spread work if backgrounds are always opaque?
> See
> ~fantasai

What about a spread that go inside the box.


Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2008 23:47:14 UTC