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

Re: Linear gradients: state of the proposal

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 10:50:18 -0800
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0911061050v3cb748f3rc15e6acaebeda293@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Nov 6, 2009, at 9:01 AM, Simon Fraser wrote:
>
> * When the angle form is used, it's unclear if the angle of the rendered
> gradient is invariant under box aspect ratio
> changesĀ <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Nov/0071.html>.
>
> As far as this one goes, I know that what I was proposing there is different
> than what Tab had in mind. However, I believe that by combining the ideas
> of:
>
> requiring a keyword to make the angle invariant (otherwise it is not) and
> the idea of just using angles to indicate direction and
> color-stops for ALL indications of where colors begin or end),
>
> ...that we would have a much, much simpler, easier to read and understand
> syntax, with less default magic, while sacrificing almost nothing but a few
> edge cases. And that those edge cases could be handled with SVG.
> I would still have the distance measures (50px, for example) as invariant
> (thus a little magic there), as an alternative to percentages that would
> always vary with image size.

I'm not sure I understand how the angle would flex, and currently
believe I would find it *very* confusing if I said "45deg" and ended
up with a gradient that wasn't a straight diagonal.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 6 November 2009 18:51:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:22 GMT