W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

Re: [css3-text] Should text-shadow have 'spread'?

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 12:28:39 -0800
Message-ID: <4F1DC2F7.2010909@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 01/23/2012 11:26 AM, Simon Fraser wrote:
> I don't think 'spread' should apply to text-shadow, yet CSS3 Text suggests that text-shadow follows box-shadow<http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text/#text-shadow>.
> For rectangles and rounded-corner rectangles, 'spread' is easy to implement by insetting or outsetting the rectangle bounds. For arbitrary shapes, spread is vastly more difficult to implement, requiring either some complex path math, or pixel-based computations that are expensive to do at drawing time. There are also complexities related to whether spread makes sharp corners rounded etc.

It's already been removed: the grammar allows 2 or 3 lengths, not 4. I'll
add a note to point this out.

Received on Monday, 23 January 2012 20:29:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:09 UTC