- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 07:48:27 -0800
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:42 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> Yeah, the intent is that it's based on the box's geometry + border >> image area (similar to how SVG's DBB is the geometry + stroke). >> Children, even if they're transformed or positioned outside the box, >> don't affect this calculation. > > If you are including the border image, why not also include the box-shadow? It is a decoration too. As Fantasai said, the extent of the box-shadow is theoretically infinite if you invoke blur; we'd have to do another one of those messy definitions defining the size relative to some percentage of shadow left behind, which I don't like. Staying with just border-image also keeps us closer to the SVG definition. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 2 March 2012 15:49:19 UTC