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

Re: [css3-images] Changing the angles in gradients

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 10:31:04 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTinAey7au9RJBai4rm1TVLOSMKtZtw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, "Robert O'Callahan" <rocallahan@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 18, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> So, we have three choices:
>>> A) Keep the angles as they are, with 0deg=East and 90deg=North
>>> B) Switch to screen-coord polar, with 0deg=East and 90deg=South
>>> C) Switch to bearing angles, with 0deg=North and 90deg=East
>> Based on the frankly overwhelming preference for C expressed in the
>> various feedback channels, particularly the css3.info poll, I'll
>> change the spec to use bearing angles.
> The css3.info one was asked in a biased way, without presenting the opposing arguments very much at all. Isn't this something for the WG to decide, rather than just you?

Given that I asked it, I considered it reasonably even.  It presents
the arguments both for CCW (matches standard polar coords, matches
tools) and for CW (matches other uses of angles).

In general, it's the editor's responsibility to make the choices over
the specs they edit.  Especially for relatively small details like
this, it's definitely not standard practice to make it a WG issue
first.  If you want to raise an issue, feel free, but the two editors
of the spec agree on this change, and we've already established in the
thread that two of the relevant implementors are fine with the change.

Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 17:31:52 UTC

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