Re: radial-gradient() proposal

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:

> On Nov 5, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
>  Wouldn't it make more sense for the default start point to be "top center"
>> so that the default is a vertical gradient, like with Tab's proposal? There
>> seem to be far more vertical gradients than diagonal gradients on the Web.
>>
>
> I was trying to avoid "magic" default values, so was defaulting to top
> left.
>

I don't see how "top left" is less magical that "top center". They're both
arbitrary, and one is more useful than the other.

Note that I was also trying to have the points follow the same shorthand
> rules as background-position, where an omitted value defaults to 'center'.
> So 'top' becomes 'center  top'.
>

Defaulting to "center" to be consistent with background-position would be
the right thing to do if "center" was at all useful for gradients, but
unfortunately it isn't.

Rob
-- 
"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
53:5-6]