W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2011

Re: [css3-images] Resolving on gradient issues

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 10:09:42 -0700
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BFC7D4C3-8D95-48CA-B1AE-EDBE0C60EA68@gmail.com>
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>

On Aug 2, 2011, at 7:00 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

>   The method proposed for
> triggering repeating behavior (namely, making the repeat* values of
> background-repeat imply a repeating gradient)

That is a slanted way of characterizing it. The way I see it, 'repeating-linear-gradient' is a way of simulating 'background-repeat' on a possibly rotated canvas. background-repeat can already create a repeating gradient (it just doesn't look good when the gradient path is angled).

> is bad in my opinion.
> The repeat keywords currently work by directly repeating the rectangle
> that the image is sized in, and I don't think it's a good idea to
> change them to activating image-format-specific alternate modes of
> repeating.

If we had a 'background-rotate: [ <angle> | auto ]' property, with an initial value of '0deg', then having 'auto' depend on the gradient angle of an image format would be no worse than 'background-size:auto' depend on the intrinsic dimensions of some image formats (mostly raster formats). And then we wouldn't need 'repeating-linear-gradient'. And there already is very little need/demand for 'repeating-radial-gradient'. 

But if I am the only one who feels that way about this, then I'll stop fighting it. It makes me weary to do so.
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 17:10:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:43 GMT