W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2009

Re: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2009-08-12

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:09:17 -0700
Message-Id: <BFF6F31B-183D-415E-8D97-CE1E88DD0DCB@gmail.com>
To: "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>

On Aug 13, 2009, at 3:15 PM, "Robert O'Callahan"  
<robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Brad Kemper  
> <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think that is what he meant, and it is not what I mean. He  
> was talking in favor of functional notation within the value of his  
> gradient property. I don't see any of what we've been mostly talking  
> about as being a difference between me saying gradient should be a  
> separate property (which is what Mozilla already has)
> No, we currently use -moz-linear-gradient() and -moz-radial-gradient 
> () as an image type, i.e., in place of url(). And that is what I want.

Understood. But that's a separate discussion from the one about color  
stop syntax, and the opposite of what Tad said he shred with you on. 
Received on Thursday, 13 August 2009 23:10:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:28 UTC