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

RE: [css3-images] linear-gradient keywords and angles are opposite

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 01:29:48 +0000
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3C4041FF83E1E04A986B6DC50F017829031F1B@TK5EX14MBXC297.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
[Brad Kemper:] 
> On Jun 8, 2011, at 5:36 PM, Sylvain Galineau wrote:
> 
> > "I cannot in good conscience support such a change unless
> > linear-gradient and/or it's prefixed versions are renamed (e.g.
> > -moz2-linear-gradient or - moz-straight-gradient)".
> >
> > You've just answered your own concern: this is a vendor decision. As
> > are all decisions pertaining to prefixed *proprietary* property. As a
> > side note, I will remind you that prefixed properties are invalid per
> > CSS; as such it would imo be awkward for the WG to accept/reject a
> > change based on proprietary decisions related to invalid CSS.
> 
> Fine. If we make the changes to the meaning of the keywords AND the angle,
> so that the only way to reliably create the desired gradient is with IE6+
> "filter" property, then I would like us to also change the name of the CSS
> image generator to something like 'straight-gradient()' to reflect how
> different it is from previous 'linear-gradient'. Then IE can create
> whatever prefixed image generator it wants, even calling it '-ms-foo()' if
> it wants, as is its prerogative.

Given the trend of both the tone and substance of your arguments I have nothing
further to add to this part of the thread. Thank you.
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2011 01:30:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:41 GMT