On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:11 PM, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote: > My objection to building shadows into the border-image itself (and I say > this knowing full well that we do this on OS X right now, e.g., iChat), is > that the shadows then become part of the the object's border box. > We have shadows built in to border images in iChat, and we have all this > negative margin trickery to simulate the fact that the shadows should be > pushed out beyond the border. It's gross. > Yeah, that's not ideal, but not uncommon. Putting a -5px margin on an object's edge that has 5px of shadow is not difficult. It is mainly a problem when you want to have it on a block that needs to have auto margins. Of course, if we had something like 'block-align:center' (to simulate the 'align=center' attribute), then that would be covered too. And it doesn't work on non-replaced inline elements or certain table display types, but inline-blocks are fine. So that doesn't bother me that much. I could also imagine a solution where we could say that border-width takes up space (whether its suppressed or not), but image-border does not. So that any difference between those two widths would not increase the size of the border-box and how it affects layout. > If the issue is having full control of what a shadow looks like, and being > able to specify some kind of image for the shadow, then why don't we just > extend box-shadow to support images? > Can you elaborate on that a little more? Maybe a rough example of how the property values would be typed out? Keeping in mind that my objectives are to have a fallback for when images and/or image-border is unavailable (a "niche" that is probably bigger than Armenian numbering or selectors that use Unicode edge-cases), while still having as much author control as possible when they are available?
Received on Thursday, 12 February 2009 21:24:10 UTC