- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 08:14:23 -0800
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <9C29D341-145A-4A9C-81B6-BAA080AEB1D7@gmail.com>
On Feb 18, 2009, at 1:25 AM, fantasai wrote: >> By the way, if I have a dashed border (whether using border-style >> or image-border) with box-shadow, and had background-clip:padding- >> box, I'd hope to have something like the following: >> http://www.bradclicks.com/cssplay/dottedAndShadowed.png >> But the current implementations of box shadow I've seen don't give >> consistent or predictable results when using border-style:dashed >> with box-shadow and background-clip:padding-box. I would be able to >> easily create this effect with image-shadow if I created the >> shadows in the images themselves. > > You wouldn't get that by the current definition, you'd get a shadow > around the border box. (Note that background-clip can be different > for different layers of the background.) > > Box-shadow is a very simplistic tool. For more sophisticated > shadowing, > you'd need a 'shadow' property that triggers a real shadow filter. Ah, but if you created that dashed box with image-border, and an automatically generated shadow as we've been discussing, then it would almost look like this. Or could look like this if we said that the padding box also cast a shadow in that combination (that included background-clip:padding-box, box-shadow, image-border, and non- transparent/non-image background). Otherwise, the images of the border would have a shadow and the visible box wouldn't, which would look weird. I am leaning towards Hyatt's idea of also having a separate "shadow" property, that used the alpha of everything in the box (including the contents and text, perhaps, if the background was not opaque (maybe a keyword to switch content-shadowing on or off?)) to determine where the shadow went. Then we could use that for this automatically generated image-border shadow too. Then for regular box-shadow the author would create his own within the image (for more control, or to partially simulate the "shadow" property) and the UA would suppress the box-shadow. It seems to me that otherwise "shadow" is the property we are generating for image- border, not "box-shadow". It makes sense to me to suppress box-shadow given that most of the infinite shapes create-able by image-border would not be box shaped. Is it too late to add "shadow" to backgrounds and borders? Or would it go in another module? I don't think there is a strong need for "border- shadow" by itself. By the way, for regular (non-image) borders with border-styles that contain empty space (dashed, dotted, double, etc.), the current implementations are not consistent in how they handle box-shadow with background-clip:padding-box. WebKit continues the shadow in the gaps (e.g. between the dashes), and FireFox/MineField does not (not the version I'm looking at anyway, so maybe that is actually a bug).
Received on Wednesday, 18 February 2009 16:15:07 UTC