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

Re: Repeating gradients (Was: Re: Talk on radial gradients)

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:54:04 -0700
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <AC04B421-127F-4A90-97E8-A384C525ABE2@gmail.com>
To: robert@ocallahan.org

On Aug 25, 2009, at 9:51 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.  
> <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed.  As I currently have it, and as Webkit does it, none of the
> background-* properties leak into the gradient() rule.  It's a
> completely independent function that just does its job drawing an
> image with the information provided and then steps back, just like
> url().
>
> The logic here is that repeating behaviour depends on the image type.
>
> I'm inclined to keep it that way.  To do otherwise is to make it act
> unpredictably when further combinations of background-* properties are
> used.  For example, when you use background-size to make the image
> less than the size of the box, what happens?  Does it repeat?
>
> No, it scales. Whether an image repeats or not is independent of the  
> image type. The only thing that varies by image type is how it  
> repeats.
>
> What if
> you want a gradient that only runs through its stops once (which would
> require no-repeat), but is then tiled across the background (which
> would require repeat)?
>
> You basically never want that.

I downloaded the Firefox nightly to see what ti was doing. Here's a  
screenshot (attached, if you don't see it inline):
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2009 16:54:54 GMT

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