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

Re: [css3-background] border-radius color transitions using gradients recommended but undefined

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:09:54 -0800
Message-ID: <4B843612.4090008@inkedblade.net>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
CC: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 02/22/2010 06:00 PM, Sylvain Galineau wrote:
>> From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net]
>> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 5:13 PM
>> To: Sylvain Galineau
>> Cc: Daniel Glazman; www-style@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: [css3-background] border-radius color transitions using
>> gradients recommended but undefined
>> Append to the paragraph:
>>     # It is not defined what these transitions look like, but a gradient
>>     # is recommended for color transitions that don't involve dotted or
>>     # dashed borders.
>> the following text:
>>     | The start and end color stops should be given by the line segments
>>     | connecting the tips of the inner radii with the corresponding tips
>>     | of the outer radii, and the halfway point between the start and end
>>     | colors should align with the transition center defined above. Conical
>>     | gradients are suggested for gradient color transitions.
>> Please let me know if this sufficiently addresses your concern.
> It is a step in the right direction in that it at least attempts to suggest an
> interoperable model. Optional, *suggested* behavior is still not something I'm comfortable
> with in a CR feature though.

Would s/suggested/recommended/ satisfy you?

> And while ...

I would appreciate less threat and more constructive criticism, Sylvain. It is
considerably more difficult for me as an editor to wade through and figure out
what changes you actually want and are ok with when you focus so much wording
explaining how you would like to make the spec fail.

There is considerably more detail that I could specify for gradients if I had a
week to spend in a university library researching the correct mathematical models
and working out the exact geometry for normal and degenerate cases. I cannot tell
from what you write whether that is something you're demanding or not, and it's
very frustrating to me that you are so angry with the current spec yet so unclear
about what it is you want from it.

Received on Tuesday, 23 February 2010 20:10:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:32 UTC