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

Re: [css3-images] conical-gradient()?

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:57:12 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTikpzE7+4Q3waLHxBV5bd6Mvz+QfNhaFwBoCzyg-@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephen Hay <haymail@gmail.com>
Cc: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
> > I think it would be better to call this an angle gradient instead of
> > conical.
>
> In Photoshop it is indeed often referred to as angle gradient (and
> this is technically correct), although most designers I know
> understand the term "conical". I actually think conical best describes
> what the gradient does visually.
>

A conic radial gradient also resembles a cone. If we call them angle
gradients, there is less chance of confusion.


>
> > Conical gradients are just a special case of a radial gradient where the
> > midpoint of start and ending circle is different.
>
> > This seems like an edge case. Neither SVG or Illustrator implement such a
> > construct so it must not be that common.
>
> I would call that a hasty generalization. Photoshop *does* implement
> it, so making a similar generalization one could argue that since
> there are more Photoshop users, it is very common.
>

Are you advocating that we also add diamond gradients?
At one point I suggested adding focal point support to radial gradients.
This is a very common idiom which is supported by the WebKit gradients and
core graphics but it was deemed to much of an edge case.

Rik
Received on Tuesday, 22 March 2011 17:57:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:38 GMT