Re: [css3-background] blending on 'box-shadow' and 'text-shadow'

Maybe a new separate keyword makes more sense and doesn't introduce all
these exceptions.

The spec text for 'color' states:

This property describes the foreground color of an element's text content (
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/#foreground)

We could call it 'text-blend-mode'...

Rik
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Apr 11, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> On Apr 10, 2012, at 5:51 PM, Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I think this problem should be solved more generically, rather than
>> adding keywords to random properties. For example, the `difference`
>> blending mode could be used on text color to make it more legible
>> regardless of background. Or, blending modes on borders and/or backgrounds
>> could produce quite interesting effects. They could also replace the
>> `invert` keyword on `outline`.
>> > Maybe a function that can be used in place of any <color> value?
>>
>> That was my first thought. Maybe even just extending rgba() and hsla() to
>> be able to do this sort of thing: rgba(255,255,0,1,m) to multiply, and
>> rgba(255,255,0,1,s) to screen.
>
>
> Doing it that way forces people to use the 'rgba' notation so they won't
> be able to do 'color: red screen'
>
>
> You wouldn't be able to do that as part of any <color> anyway, because the
> space would confuse shorthand properties that use a space. Maybe if there
> was a new separator that wasn't used elsewhere it would work, like
> 'background: red•screen'.
>
> Another issue is that this implies that you can use it in gradient color
> stops which would be very strange.
>
>
> True. Same issue if you use 'red screen' or 'red•screen' in a gradient. Or
> if you use any syntax of color mode in an animation or transition to go
> between two color modes. You'd have to say that there is a sharp cutoff
> midway between any two color modes.
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 16:54:16 UTC