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

Re: radial-gradient() proposal

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 13:53:30 -0800
Message-Id: <DC06F931-FDD7-48B5-BF5C-0499DB9081C6@gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Nov 6, 2009, at 11:07 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>  
wrote:

>> If I resize any other image in a browse or any other software, the  
>> contents also resize to the new dimensions, no matter how distorted  
>> (assuming the software allows me to change the aspect ratio of the  
>> image). As the aspect ratio changes, so does the angle of any lines  
>> in the image (except for multiples of 90deg). That is totally  
>> intuitive.
>> So, if you just assume a square when specifying the angle, the  
>> results of fitting the square to other aspect ratios is completely  
>> predictable. It bcemes exactly like an eps file in a page layout  
>> program
>
> I strongly disagree with disregarding the angle here. If I specify an
> angle, I should get that angle, not some random transformation of it
> depending on the size of the box.

Irs not random, and I am not saying to disregard the angle. I am  
saying there could be a simple keyword switch between treating it like  
any other angle in almost any other image format (including what  
designers are used to when they specify a gradient angle in Adobe  
illustrator, and then stretch that EPS file in Adobe InDesign), and  
treating it magically so that the angle stays the same even when the  
box changes shape.

On angles of 0, 90, 180, or 270 (the most common for gradients) there  
wouldn't even be a difference.

> If I want the gradient to size with
> the box, then I should specify it in start and end points because  
> those
> are defined to be relative to the box.

If you do it my way, then you illuminate the need for start and end  
points (you still have distances or percentages you can associate with  
each color), thus vastly simplifying the multitude of ways to create  
the same gradation. Thus making it easier to learn the syntax by  
seeing other people's examples.

>
>> In the cases where you want something else, then you are asking for  
>> magic, something that makes this different from most other images.  
>> I say do ghat with a keyword.
>
> Changing the angle when I give an angle is considerably more "magic"
> than actually drawing the angle I specified.

I disagree. Diagonal angles in the image data of most image formats DO  
change when you change the height-width aspect ratio of the image. 
Received on Friday, 6 November 2009 21:54:19 GMT

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