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

Re: Filling text with a gradient/image

From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:16:12 -0500
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, David Perrell <davidp@hpaa.com>, Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-id: <6B39011C-3EBA-4632-ADB1-096CFD73DB28@apple.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
I don't like the term text-background since WebKit distinguishes  
between fill and stroke of text, and you should be able to supply  
unique backgrounds to both.

dave

On Aug 16, 2009, at 3:37 PM, Brad Kemper wrote:

> On Aug 16, 2009, at 12:26 PM, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 15, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> To be clear: the sucky one was the Webkit idea.  My idea of using
>>> text-fill with the full set of background properties shouldn't be
>>> sucky.  ^_^  It's approaching the problem in the correct direction.
>>>
>>
>>
>> background-clip: text is not being proposed.  :)
>>
>> I agree with the idea of enhancing text-fill.
>
> How about something called "text-background" that has all all the  
> background-* properties preceded by "text-"? The values for text- 
> background-clip would be different ("glyph", "line" or "all"). If  
> "text-background-clip: glyph" or "text-background-clip: line", then  
> a 100% height for background-size would mean from the top of the  
> line to the baseline. "text-background-clip: line" would repeat the  
> background on every line, and "text-background-clip: glyph" would  
> repeat the background on every glyph.
>
> This would create a lot of equivelance between filling text and  
> filling backgrounds, so it would be easy to learn and quick to move  
> from editors draft to recommendation.  And you then wouldn't need  
> text-fill.
>
Received on Sunday, 16 August 2009 21:17:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:20 GMT