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

Re: [css3-images] Summary of recent gradient issues

From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:09:02 +1000
Message-ID: <4DF8224E.9090400@css-class.com>
To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 15/06/2011 11:34 AM, Brian Manthos wrote:
> Behalf Of Tab Atkins Jr.
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Simon Fraser<smfr@me.com>  wrote:
>>> In my quick Twitter straw poll, everyone, without exception, said that
>>> linear-gradient(left, black, white) would have black on the left, so
>>> 'left' denotes the start point. There was zero confusion on this
>>> issue, which provides support for #5 and demotes #4.
>> What if you then asked "Given that 270deg points to the left, do you expect
>> linear-gradient(270deg,black,white) to be the same or opposite linear-
>> gradient(left,black,white)?"?  ^_^
>> ~TJ

The same. The linear-gradient with degrees point to the left (like a 
compass on a map where the top of the map faces north). The 
linear-gradient referring a side begins from the left since this is what 
authors are use to when using background-position plus it's fits quite 
well with the sides of the box model (margin, border, padding and 
content) and where positioned element with offset <value> are positioned.

I prefer 5 and 2.

> Or perhaps...
> "Why do these render the same?
> 	(a) linear-gradient(bottom, red, blue);
> 	(b) linear-gradient(0deg, red, blue);
> "

The shouldn't render the same.

Alan Gresley
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2011 03:09:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:46 UTC