- From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 20:17:48 +0100
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, "kennyluck@csail.mit.edu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
> On 24 Nov 2014, at 18:42, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Nov 24, 2014, at 8:53 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: >> >> Possibilities: >> a - at least 1px of the outline is still visible >> b - the entire outline’s thickness is still visible >> c - something else > > Or just let the outline disappear once the offsets would overlap each other in either dimension. Just as if you had something like 'box-shadow: 0 0 0 20px white inset, 0 0 0 21px black inset', the visible part of the black shadow disappears at smaller box sizes. That’s possible indeed, but I don’t think I prefer it, as this risk to cause accidentally disappearing outlines, causing usability or accessibility issues. > PS. I've used box-shadow before as a substitute for outline, with white to look like the page background, or some other color to look like the element background when needing negative offsets, when I've been frustrated by the annoying inability of 'outline' to follow the contours of border-radius. The WG has agreed to your position, and working it out is on my todo list, but let’s keep the thread separate if you want to talk about the details of this. - Florian
Received on Monday, 24 November 2014 19:18:12 UTC