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

Re: [CSS3] Some thoughts about functions, notation and gradient().

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:23:50 -0500
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0908201323r24f6e01at1d101c82d54c911f@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 3:16 PM, L. David Baron<dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> On Thursday 2009-08-20 12:44 -0700, Brad Kemper wrote:
>> On Aug 20, 2009, at 10:25 AM, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
>>> For inside, the
>>> length of the gradient line would be the length that touches the
>>> edges of the background positioning area.
>>
>> Personally, I don't think 'inside' is needed. I don't see gradients like
>> that much in the wild, and Tab's use case for 'inside' was to keep the
>> gradient confined to one corner.
>
> Fine with me.
>
>>> For outside, the length
>>> of the gradient line would be the longest length such that the
>>> perpendiculars to the ends of the gradient line intersect the
>>> corners of the background positioning area.  (Longest because there
>>> are shorter such lengths, but they intersect the wrong corners.)
>>
>> I think that amounts to the same gradient (you are even using similar
>> wording as I did for describing where it ends). The path you describe is
>> parallel to the one starting from a corner and has the sane length. Each
>> color in the gradient is perpendicular to both paths.
>
> Ah, right.  For 'outside' it is the same gradient.  (Though it isn't
> for 'inside'.)

I think that in most cases I can probably estimate the width of the
box and get an approximation of 'inside'.  So I'll go ahead and drop
it.

I've also dropped the / from the rule, and put a comma in place.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 20 August 2009 20:24:54 GMT

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