- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:45:00 -0800
- To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Jordan OSETE <jordan.osete@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Agreed that the rather loose definition of text-shadow allows spread. But it may need some additional language if we are going to allow sharp corners in a way that is similar in spirit to how we allow sharp corner offsets for box-shadow spread. But that is not absolutely necessary in my opinion. But I would count that as something that needs deciding.
I agree with Jordan that it is reasonable to also consider inset shadows and foreground color for feature requests for text-shadow.
On Mar 8, 2011, at 1:57 PM, Brian Manthos wrote:
> Jordan Osete:
>> So... about the proposal, it seems that there are now 3 main requests:
>> - accept foreground-color in the text-shadow declaration, for graceful
>> degradation
>> - allow the specification of a spread radius for shadows
>> - allow inset shadows
>>
>> Could these be considered, and added to the standard ?
>
> Regarding spread radius...
>
> Pick your poison...
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text/#text-shadow
> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-text/#text-shadow
>
> Both of them say...
> "<shadow> is the same as defined for the ‘box-shadow’ property except that the ‘inset’ keyword is not allowed"
> ...so spread radius is already allowed because...
>
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-background/#the-box-shadow
> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#the-box-shadow
>
> <shadow> = inset? && [ <length>{2,4} && <color>? ]
>
> •The third length is a blur radius. Negative values are not allowed. If the blur value is zero, the shadow's edge is sharp. Otherwise, the larger the value, the more the shadow's edge is blurred. See below.
>
> Cheers,
> - Brian
>
Received on Tuesday, 8 March 2011 23:45:38 UTC