- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:28:00 -0600
- To: robert@ocallahan.org
- Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> However, could we achieve what we want by simply having each pixel >> inherit the highest alpha value of any pixel within X of it, with X >> depending on the spread? Negative spreads would inherit the lowest >> alpha instead. > > > Maybe. It's totally unclear to me what "spread" means in this situation, so > it's not clear what authors would want or expect. Well, I don't have a browser on hand right now that implements the spread value on box-shadow, so I can't be certain, but what I described above *appears* to be what's intended by the spec text. Wherever the shadow would be drawn, increase its boundary by X pixels first. Of course, if anyone is currently implementing it they'll be doing so in a much more efficient way (you can just draw a bigger box, no need for per-pixel operations).
Received on Thursday, 12 February 2009 23:28:44 UTC