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

Re: [css3-images] Proposed Gradients changes

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 18:33:33 -0800
Message-Id: <60F18A53-E1D5-45EF-B22A-E311627AAAEC@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>

Brad Kemper

On Nov 18, 2010, at 6:20 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 18, 2010, at 4:01 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I don't like the keywords you have, though - I'd rather just restrict
>>> it to "[ [left | right] || [top | bottom] ]" and still parse it like a
>>> background position (that is, "left bottom" and "bottom left" both
>>> work and mean the same thing).
>> I won't put quite as much energy into debating that, as we are now much closer to agreement than before. :)
>> I do still prefer one keyword rather than 3-5.
> It's 1-2, actually.  No endpoint, because the endpoint is inferred,
> just like it is in the current syntax.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of that either. It lacks obviousness. "bottom left" doesn't look anything like a direction. I like thinks that are clear, as well as simple. Having a single keyword ( or even two, with a "to" to connect them) that refers to corners the way English speakers and border-radius does would satisfy that much better, even though it is a bit more typing. After all, even "bottom" is more typing than "90deg". If the purpose of using words line "bottom", "top", "left", and "right" is to make it more clear without having to understand and perform an extra step of indirection, then inferring an unwritten point should be thrown out too. 
Received on Friday, 19 November 2010 02:34:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:41 UTC