W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2013

Re: [css-text-decor-3] Is handling of no-<color> text-shadow for text decorations intentional?

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 03:57:30 -0400
Message-ID: <51B586EA.2030502@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/07/2013 06:27 PM, fantasai wrote:
> On 05/06/2013 11:06 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text-decor-3/#text-shadow-property
>> specifies how to handle the omission of <color> only by reference to
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#the-box-shadow , which says
>> that when the <color> part of a shadow is omitted, the 'color'
>> property is used.
>>
>> In Gecko, which I believe implemented text-shadow before this was
>> specified, we instead shadow the color that was drawn.  For text,
>> this yields the same result, but for text decorations, it yields a
>> different result.
>
> It's not intentional, and I currently have no opinion on this.

Edited per WG resolution
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013May/0377.html

   # If the color of the shadow is not specified, the shadow has
   # the color of the ink it shadows; that is, it matches the
   # ‘color’ property when shadowing text, and the ‘text-decoration-color’
   # property when shadowing text decorations.

However, there's an open issue here: what happens if the colors
are semi-transparent? Are we shadowing the text and the decorations
individually, or the composite text+decorations? I think the latter
makes the most sense, especially when we consider the simple case
of solid text.

> An interesting question: what color should it be once we can
> do patterned fills?

This question still stands.

~fantasai
Received on Monday, 10 June 2013 07:58:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:12 UTC