- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:14:41 -0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Dave Methvin" <dave.methvin@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:59:55 -0200, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Dave Methvin <dave.methvin@gmail.com> > wrote: >> For the purposes of animation and other programmatic use, it would be >> very helpful to treat text-shadow as a shorthand property, then define >> text-shadow-color, text-shadow-x, text-shadow-y, and text-shadow-radius >> as its subcomponents. That would be consistent with other CSS shorthand >> properties such as border-right or background, where the individual >> components are made available via separate CSS properties. > > I am generally in favor of breaking down any complex property into > simple sub-properties. I know, though, that implementors generally > want to limit the number of properties in existence, because each one > requires an entry on every element, increasing memory usage. > > I'm not sure where the correct line to draw is. Shadows can be rather > nice to animate, though - adjusting the depth of a shadow when you > hover over something to represent it 'moving up' toward your mouse, > for example. If the use case is manipulation through script (and not through e.g. :hover) the correct solution might be an appropriate value interface in the CSSOM. Unfortunately I haven't really had time since TPAC yet to even start drafting the ideas around value APIs. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 23 November 2009 19:15:26 UTC