- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:11:59 -0700
- To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote: > On Jun 22, 2010, at 3:20 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> If we don't want to change text-shadow (we don't), then we should go >> ahead and make the blur length specify the full size of the blur >> region, like Brad suggests. While I do prefer the other way, I value >> consistency between nearly-identical properties more. > > That's not what I see. Don't forget that shadows larger than 8px are > buggy in WebKit. Here's a test with an 8px shadow: > <http://smfr.org/misc/shadow.html> > > and here's what it looks like in WebKit: > <http://smfr.org/misc/shadow-webkit.png> > > The box and text shadows are identical, and Pixie shows that the shadow extends out by 8px (for a total shadow transition of 16px). Hmm, my own somewhat unscientific test of taking a screenshot and checking pixel colors in GIMP doesn't agree. I get 4px of blur extending out from the character. (On one side there's a 5th layer of pixels that are #fefefe, but I think we can chalk that up to vagaries of gaussian blurs.) Similarly, I have 4px of gradually solidifying color extending inwards (again, with one extra layer of #010101 on some sides, but again, that's okay). Perhaps platform differences are causing this? I'm using Chrome5 and FF3.6 on Linux. Roc, does Firefox have similarly buggy behavior with shadows > 8px? Like I said, I looked in both Firefox and Chrome with a 100px blur shadow, and they both agreed that the shadow extended outwards by approximately 50px. (By the way, FF's text-shadows are absolutely beautiful at large sizes - good job.) >>> 2. In the public-fx group, we will be discussion the addition of filters to CSS, with convenience properties for common filters. Blur will be one of these, and it will have a radius, as input, which should give behavior comparable to box/text-shadow's blur radius. This filter will be based on SVG's gaussian blur, and so the behavior of the radius parameter should match SVG. >> >> If we want the blur filter to work similarly to text-shadow, then it >> needs to work as Brad wants. > > I think we agree that the following should all match: > > * text-shadow > * box-shadow > * SVG gaussian blur > * hypothetical future blur filter in CSS > * PhotoShop, probably > > and bonus points if we choose something that matches what browsers do today (modulo bugs). Agreed that we should match as much as possible. That's why the text-shadow is kicking me over to Brad's camp. ^_^ ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2010 01:12:52 UTC