- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:57:03 +0200
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Dennis Amrouche <dennis@screenlabor.de>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Ins't conformance is that, where the shadow is measurable, it measures correctly as being equal to the result of a gaussian blur of the given radius, to the accuracy of expression of the implementation (e.g. 8-bit pixels). This completely avoids the question of an edge, which doesn't exist in a gaussian anyway. On Jul 27, 2010, at 5:58 , Sylvain Galineau wrote: >> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On >> Behalf Of Tab Atkins Jr. > > >> So, yeah, like Brad says, if the "range of pixels within which the >> shadow becomes effectively invisible to the human eye" is a bit off at >> very high shadow blur lengths, you'll never notice. It's a pretty >> unimportant point. > > To the human eye, sure. Now, can we talk about testing implementations > for conformance ? David Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 27 July 2010 13:57:39 UTC