- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:25:03 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 14/09/15 19:15, Simon Fraser wrote: >> On Sep 14, 2015, at 8:24 AM, Adenilson Cavalcanti >> <a.cavalcanti@samsung.com <mailto:a.cavalcanti@samsung.com>> wrote: >> >> The border style spec >> (http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-backgrounds/#the-border-style >> <http://dev.w3..org/csswg/css-backgrounds/#the-border-style>) is >> implemented in probably all browsers and has being around for quite a >> long time. >> >> I observed that the description of the behavior for 'groove’ value >> (and the complementary 'ridge') is a bit vague about what the UA is >> supposed to do. >> >> Quoting: "Looks as if it were carved in the canvas. (This is typically >> achieved by creating a “shadow” from two colors that are slightly >> lighter and darker than the ‘border-color’.)" >> >> I think the 'two colors' part could be more descriptive. >> >> What if we changed it to be clearer and write something like: >> “The light color should be a percentage of the darker color, between >> 20% to 50% of its absolute value. And the darker color a percentage in >> a range of 70% to 90% of border color." >> >> Another issue is that the behavior for black border could be explicit. >> I think we could follow up with: "In case the border color is black, a >> shade of gray must be used as the lighter color.” I’m in favor of suggesting a non-normative but well-defined algorithm in the spec. > I think a good way to spec this would be to spec lighten() and darken() > color functions, which you could then refer to in the groove/inset > border spec. Would color(… lightness(…)) from https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color/#modifying-colors work? -- Simon Sapin
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2015 18:25:37 UTC