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

Re: radial-gradient() proposal

From: Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 17:06:18 -0600
Message-ID: <ab96c3ef0911061506i36961f3dm8ffba0d4ad8a7d5d@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 6, 2009, at 11:07 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>>> 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.
>
> Indeed they do.  But that's not what's happening.  We're not creating
> an image and then transforming the aspect ratio.  We find the aspect
> ratio and then paint into a box of the appropriate size.
>
> ~TJ

Right. The problem is that often the size of the box is not known
beforehand to the author when the style is created. If an angle is
given the gradient should display at that angle, unless the author
explicitly applies a transform that changes the aspect ratio.

Brad: maybe what would work instead is a gradient defined by a slope
which was relative to the aspect ratio of the box? This could be fully
described by the two end-point form, each given in percentages. e.g. a
gradient from (30%, 0%) to (70%, 0%) would do the equivalent of a
resolution independent resize as the containing box changed
dimensions.
Received on Friday, 6 November 2009 23:06:50 GMT

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