W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2009

Re: [css3-background] possibly too late for last call, but: background-opacity?

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:40:19 -0700
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-Id: <01944121-9724-4A18-AF0E-88B7C166A1F3@gmail.com>
To: Lee Owen <fleeboy@gmail.com>
On Oct 15, 2009, at 8:27 AM, Lee Owen wrote:

> I would like to second Patrick's recommendation for "background- 
> opacity".
> I have been using transparent png's also but I would like to animate  
> this opacity over time using css transitions or jquery. The effect  
> would be great with multiple backgrounds using animated opacity  
> depending on user interaction.
> Please consider this.
> regards,
> Lee
> --------------
> Lee Owen
> ==================================
> lee@fleeboy.com | www.twitter.com/fleeboy
> www.fleeboy.com | www.creativefront.co.uk
> ==================================

In my proposal for 'drop-shadow' [1], I had a function within a value  
to limit what parts of the element get the CSS drop shadow applied to  
them, using a notation like this:

apply-to(border + foreground, background-image + background-color)

But recently, I've been thinking this could instead be a separate  
property, like this:

apply-effect: drop-shadow, border + foreground, background-image +  

In which case it could also be used for opacity, visibility, display  
(maybe, if very limited), and maybe some other properties. The  
properties and values would still be written as normal, but this extra  
property would limit how they were applied for the given selector (the  
rest of the element would get the default values). So for what you  
want, you could do something like this:

opacity:0.5; apply-to(opacity, background-image + background-color);

[1] http://www.bradclicks.com/cssplay/drop-shadow/Drop-Shadow.html

Received on Thursday, 15 October 2009 17:41:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:13:40 UTC