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

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

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:30:05 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTim16NH9Dkqz1xWB-ZcrVWnRJOKYw1g6NwvkBq-+xNEeHA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2011, at 4:12 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> gain, my objection is *not* to the value definitions on their own.  I
>> was obviously fine with each of them on their own, since I wrote them
>> that way.  It is precisely the two types of values in combination that
>> concern me.  Two locally-good decisions can be bad when combined due
>> to them being inconsistent with each other.
> They aren't combined though. You either use one or the other, and at least some of us don't see these separate values as inconsistent with each other. If you ask one question after the other, without setting up expectations that the meanings should be linked, then you can see from the answers if people think that way on their own.
>> That's why I very specifically brought up the two in concert, to
>> explore how people intuitively relate the two.
> It's not intuition that is influencing their answers, it is the subtle suggestion that their answer to what 'left' means should be linked to their understanding of what '0deg' means. That's the the very thing that I disagree with.

In an ideal world, they *are* linked, so that understanding one helps
you understand the other.  We should be willing to accept a little bit
of local badness in return for global consistency, because global
inconsistency kills you by inches.

Received on Friday, 17 June 2011 00:30:53 UTC

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