- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 15:14:37 -0700
- To: David Perrell <davidp@hpaa.com>
- Cc: W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On Aug 4, 2009, at 3:04 PM, "David Perrell" <davidp@hpaa.com> wrote: > David Hyatt wrote: > | Unlike shadows they can be quite large. I'm on the fence about what > | type of overflow a reflection would be.... anyone have any opinions? > > Simulated phenomena, same as shadows and glow. > > I'd put motion blur in the same category. I wouldn't want a blur > effect > increasing scroll dimensions, at least not by default. > > David Perrell > > Me too. I would suggest we use "ink overflow" for anything described as having no affect on layout (defining what that means more precisely), provided it is not a property that can move content of the element it is applied to around (thus excluding positioning from this definition).
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 22:15:35 UTC