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

Re: Gradient syntax proposal

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:10:08 -0500
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0908171310s431cd573q6e12b830ccb08dd0@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM, fantasai<fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> (Not quite true, actually - now that I've allowed lengths in
>> color-stops, it's possible for you to use "in" on one stop, "px" on
>> another, and "em" on a third, thus producing an ordering that can vary
>> wildly based on pixel size and text size.  At that point you're really
>> digging your own grave, though - you can screw up your design in a
>> million different ways by mixing different classes of lengths, and I
>> don't feel it important to protect you from doing so in this one
>> circumstance.  You still can't mix lengths and %, though, which would
>> be the primary cause of order-switching, so I'm content.)
> I would prefer restricting stops to percentages. The swapping effect
> is confusing, and I don't see any reason you'd /need/ to use lengths
> when you can specify the length of the overall gradient already.

That is true.  One of the benefits of the full point-to-point syntax -
you can specify a gradient as, say, "left top to left 200px top" and
then 1% = 2px.

On the other hand, that works *only* when you're specifying a static
length for the gradient-line.  If you still want the gradient to
stretch across an element, you're sort of screwed.

At this point I'm really not sure what's best.  Some more author
feedback would be convenient, even if it's just implicit feedback from
looking at gradients in the wild.

Does anybody have a collection of in-the-wild gradient uses?  I wanna
check some out.

Received on Monday, 17 August 2009 20:11:08 UTC

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