From: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:36:27 +0200
Cc: Matt Rakow <marakow@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Lea Verou <lea@verou.me>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <201404112036.27433.bert@w3.org>
On Tuesday 01 April 2014 01:28:44 fantasai wrote:
> On 03/24/2014 09:36 AM, Matt Rakow wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > There seem to be a couple issues with the wording of the new box-shadow
> >
> > 1. "when the ratio r of a border radius to the spread distance
> >
> >    is less than one" -- this should be the magnitude of the ratio,
> >    to account for negative spread distances.
>
> Hm. Actually, I don't think this should apply to negative spread
> distances. Or if it does, it needs to be a different formula: if
> the spread distance is negative and equal in magnitude to the
> border radius, it is going to result in a sharp corner regardless.
>
>    1+(1-1)^3 = 1 ratio adjustment
>
>
> (Equivalent to no change from the previous CR.) Let me know
> if you think something else would be better.

I've done an "implementation" of the corrected paragraph from the editors'
draft and tested various values of border radius and spread (big, small,
positive, negative) and it appears to be correct.

While writing the two conditions for negative spread and small ratio, I
noticed, however, that it's actually just one condition: one can replace the
two phrases

when the ratio r of a border radius to the spread distance is less than
one
and
does not apply to negative spread distances
by

because the border radius is always greater than or equal to 0.

But

--
Bert Bos                                ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/
http://www.w3.org/people/bos                               W3C/ERCIM
bert@w3.org                             2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93
+33 (0)4 92 38 76 92            06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Friday, 11 April 2014 18:37:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:39 UTC