- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 17:16:51 -0700
- To: Lev Solntsev <greli@mail.ru>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Oct 16, 2012, at 12:24 PM, "Lev Solntsev" <greli@mail.ru> wrote: > >> [skipped] >> >> We *could* allow you to omit the second length, but it doesn't seem to >> be worth very much. How often is a shadow just projected up/down? >> Potentially more useful is to assume that, if the second length is >> omitted, it's *the same* as the first length. That's a much more >> common case in my experience. > > Also it will be consistent with other properties which propagate existing > length to omitted values, like margin and padding. I think it's more important to be consistent with other properties that take one horizontal value and one vertical value (like the old version of background-position).
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2012 00:17:30 UTC