W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2010

Re: [css3-images] Repeating oblique gradients

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 13:52:08 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTikSZxOkq5WumkQZfAYhEW_7JrBB=bt3ncwxfcLC@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@adobe.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2010, at 10:22 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Correct, gradients are images, and you tile images.  My point is that
>> tiling images is a *different thing* than repeating gradients
>
> You point doesn't make sense. Since a gradient is an image, that is equivalent to saying 'tiling images is a *different thing* than repeating images'. It isn't. Repeating color stops independently is obviously different, but unnecesary for backgrounds, and unproven to be necessary for other properties.

Sigh.  No, that's not at all what I'm saying, and I know you know
that.  I'm saying that tiling an image *as an image* (that is, as a
generic rectangle of paint) is different than repeating a gradient.


>> It could be that we're just abstracting the ability in different ways.
>> I consider the tiling effect as I state above.  You appear to
>> consider it as a more general effect that is specialized to the image
>> type.  I don't fully understand your position, so I may be misstating.
>
> My position is that even though most images are rectangles that are stamped out parallel to the page edges, generated gradients do not have to be stamped out in the same way. When background properties see that the image is a gradient, they can supress the angle direction from expressing within the image, and instead rotate the entire background layer in such a way that the final result is that the rendered direction of the gradient within the background is the same as it would be in other properties. Supposing that the image is repeating in the gradient direction, then 'background-size' would determine whether the entire background painting area is filled with gradient, or you just see an angled strip of gradient.
>
> With this strategy, we eliminate the ugly versions of horizontal and vertical  rectangles tiles, avoid the need to expand the syntax of gradients, and allow authors to use what they already know for creating repeating patterns.

And eliminate the ability to create gradient tiles, which actually is
kinda useful with radial gradients.  (I agree that there's no much use
for diagonal linear gradient tiles - they're just ugly.)  For example,
creating a background with a regular pattern of dots can be used with
sized and tiled radial gradients.

I don't want to try and be "smart" here, and end up eliminating valid use-cases.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 21:53:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:34 GMT