- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 10:50:18 -0800
- 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 > changes <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 UTC