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

Re: radial-gradient() proposal

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 11:04:44 -0800
Message-ID: <4AF4734C.7020703@inkedblade.net>
To: robert@ocallahan.org
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com 
> <mailto:smfr@me.com>> wrote:
> 
>     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.

Agreed.

>     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.

background-position's initial value is 0% 0%, i.e. top left.
image-position/fit-position's initial value is 50% 50%, i.e. center.
In the places where we use background positioning syntax, the default
value if none is given changes depending on what is most useful.

~fantasai
Received on Friday, 6 November 2009 19:05:34 GMT

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