- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:23:44 -0700
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, Prabs Chawla <pchawla@microsoft.com>
On Apr 28, 2010, at 1:06 PM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote: > Brad, I don't understand what is 'extreme' about my example or why > it's more extreme than your own. Mine was a little extreme too, but mainly because it is harder to see where spread stops and blur starts when using smaller values. Usually when I spread shadows in PhotoShop, it is by a few points, usually less than the blur amount. When you have a lot of spread and not much (or any) blur, it starts looking less like a shadow, and more like something else. I can't recall the last time I used more than 10pt of spread on anything that was supposed to really look like a shadow. Sometimes, when using it as a faux glow, I add > But by playing > with increasing spread values in both Opera and Firefox - which, as > far as I can tell, implement spread radius as you > and Elika define it - then I do reach a point where the shadow's > shape is very different from that of the box > being shadowed, as well as that of previous less spread-out shadows. > > For example, using Opera 10.5x and Firefox 3.6.x : > > #ref { > width:50px; > height:50px; > margin:200px; > border: 1px solid black; > border-radius: 5px; > -moz-border-radius: 5px; > box-shadow: 0 0 0 10px blue, 0 0 0 50px green, 0 0 0 > 160px red; > -moz-box-shadow: 0 0 0 10px blue, 0 0 0 50px green, 0 0 0 > 160px red; > } > > From the blue to the green and then the red shadow, is the shadow > surface being evenly expanded > in all directions ? I think the answer is yes and I gather from your > feedback that this is what > spreading is supposed to do. But has the *shape* of the shadow been > preserved all along ? I don't > get that part at all. The outer edge of each of the shadows is > visibly different from that of > any of the other shadows, never mind the outer border edge box being > shadowed. > > So it seems I was like Simon: I didn't understand what spreading > was. And then inferred it > from a requirement to preserve shape when a spread radius is > applied, requirement I do not see > being fulfilled with an even surface spread. > > I think an example like the one above annotated with arrows may be > helpful in clarifying the meaning > of spread radius and I can try to produce one. Most importantly, > what shape is being preserved, or > how it is preserved ought to be clarified. Maybe it's just a matter > of making it clear that *only* sharp > corners retain their border-radius ?
Received on Wednesday, 28 April 2010 21:31:39 UTC