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

Re: [css3-background] bg-position syntax clarification

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 13:47:37 -0500
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0908221147g7b3b2516u5b649424bf4de609@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Brad Kemper<brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
> And this does not strike you as adding a whole extra level of complexity
> that is completely unnecessary, compared to just giving a single measurement
> for each of the first or last stops along the gradient path? The total
> (100%) gradient path length is going to be either the distance between two
> corners, or a distance determined by an author-specified angle (the
> "outside" distance). Any pointed plotted in a 2-dimensional space, as with
> <bg-position>, can also be found in a line that intersects the gradient path
> at a right angle.
>
> I would much rather err on the side of keeping the grammar simple, than on
> adding complexity that would only matter tiny bit, and only then for a tiny,
> tiny, tiny fraction of the times they are used.

I'm not adding any complexities, and this is not directly related to
gradients at all.  If people can't easily understand the <bg-position>
syntax they'll have trouble using it *in the background-position
property*.

This is nothing more and nothing less than an attempt to rephrase the
explanation of <bg-position> in Backgrounds and Borders under the
background-position property in a way that makes more sense.

Do you have any comments about what I actually wrote?

~TJ
Received on Saturday, 22 August 2009 18:48:37 GMT

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