W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2005

Re: Gradients in CSS3?

From: Slalomsk8er <slalomsk8er@solnet.ch>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 01:33:49 +0200
Message-ID: <4301265D.8020709@solnet.ch>
To: www-style@w3.org

Laurens Holst wrote:

>
> Matthew Raymond wrote:
>
>> Ben Ward wrote:
>>  
>> | background-color: blue;
>> | background-color: gradient(blue, red, 90deg);
>>   
>
>
> The cascading can in theory make it degrade well as Matthew pointed
> out, but: will authors specify a fallback colour? For every author
> that doesn’t, the page is probably impossible or very hard to use on
> browsers that don’t support those gradients. So, the syntax would at
> least need to inherently provide a fallback, like:
>
> background-color: blue;
> background-color-gradient-to: top-bottom red;
>
> Because of the above mentioned reason, this is a better syntax than
> gradient().
>
> Of course, this doesn’t necessarily prevent a gradient colour function
> from appearing in CSS, but they are certainly not arguments in favour,
> and show that even a thing that seems so simple needs to be thought
> out thoroughly...
>
>
> ~Grauw

I don't think this is needed as the background-colors default is
|transparent so it will look like a "normal" box but if you are a
webmaster and do a gradient not from or to transparent, then I hope you
did set a |background-color like Ben wrote. But where is the problem? As
long as the content can be read and the page does not look like in a
candyshop (this can happen with background-color-gradient-to:) it does
not bother me.

With background-color: blue; background-color-gradient-to: top-bottom
red; how can I get it to look clean (background-color: |transparent;|)
if the browser fails know the gradient? It is a design nightmare if the
background-color is always part of the gradient!


Dominik
Received on Monday, 15 August 2005 21:33:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:40 GMT