Re: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2009-02-04: box-shadow and border-image

On Feb 5, 2009, at 2:37 PM, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> wrote:

> Also sprach Brad Kemper:
>
>>> But the end result is an image with a frozen pixmap shadow at a  
>>> fixed
>>> resolution and color, forever tied to the border image. I don't want
>>> that. I want box shadows as vectors that are suitable for printing
>>
>> So now the argument is that it is not OK for the shadow to be a  
>> pixelated
>> raster in situations where the image-based border is a pixelated  
>> raster?
>
> We should avoid images wherever possible.

Your not avoiding images. They are already there in the image-border.  
Your just treating resolution indepenance for shadows as though it is  
vastly more important than the designer's choice to sacrifice  
resolution indepenance for a raster effect, and more important than  
having a good fallback plan. It is not. Not by a long shot. You would  
hardly notice the difference for most shadows that are just a few  
shades of gray in a small space.i And none of these particular  
tradeoffs and alternate means of doing things were discussed in the WG  
meeting. The resulting decision was rash, IMO. Nothing personal, but I  
think it is pretty clear that this was not a author-friendly decision.

>>> and
>>> DOM manipulations, that compress well. They should be setable
>>> independently of the border image. E.g., it should be easy to  
>>> change the
>>> box shadow color when when hovering over the element.
>>
>> It is. Use a different image for hover. People do it all the time  
>> already
>> (with background images).
>
> We're trying to move away from having to generate lots of images :)

You'd already be using them for the border. Don't you think authors  
are going to change the image border color on hover over buttons  
anyway? Of course they will. With new (very small). You save nothing.

>
>
> -h&kon
>              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
> howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome

Received on Thursday, 5 February 2009 23:06:14 UTC