- From: Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:39:48 -0500
- To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com> wrote: > Brendan Kenny: >> "blur-radius" does make sense, but plain "blur" might be better there, I'm >> not sure. > > Except that Brad's right -- it's a diameter not a radius. > > - Brian > As defined "The blur radius is perpendicular to and centered on the shadow's edge and defines a gradient color transition ranging from the full shadow color at the radius endpoint inside the shadow to fully transparent at the endpoint outside it." and as usually implemented (as a Gaussian or Gaussian-like function), radius is the more appropriate term. However, the distinction isn't terribly important, as radius and diameter are (obviously) just a constant factor apart. The current language would just have to be tweaked accordingly.
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2010 16:40:24 UTC