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

Re: [css3-images] Linear gradients feedback

From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:43:31 -0700
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-id: <994DC6AB-6792-464A-BC43-AB2CCB1A5610@me.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Sep 7, 2010, at 8:15 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:59 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>> And you'd rather use a comma than "to"? I think it's clearer to use "to"
>> since we're separating the colors with commas.
> 
> I prefer commas because it's more consistent, and it's how nearly
> every programming language does functions, particularly javascript.
> 
>> While we're at it, the use of a comma to separate the geometry from the
>> colors also bothers me for the same reason.
>> 
>> How about
>> linear-gradient(<position> [to <position>]? as <color>, <color>, ...)
>> ?
> 
> That seems even worse to me.  ^_^
> 
>> If the problem is DOM access, why not define different interfaces for
>> them (LinearBoxGradient and LinearAngleGradient), but leave the parsed
>> syntax the same?
> 
> That's smfr's call.  What do you think, Simon?  Would that be sufficient?

It doesn't help with interpolation for animation.

Simon
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2010 04:44:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:31 GMT