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

Re: [css3-images] simplifying radial gradients

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 08:47:07 -0700
Cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, www-style@w3.org
Message-Id: <6635312C-2237-4263-84D6-EB8B16F6845B@gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>

On Oct 7, 2011, at 2:44 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would love to resolve within two weeks. Unfortunately, when the main
>> person I need to resolve it with has said "I've decided to reject [Brad's]
>> proposal for simplifying radial gradients", and doesn't suggest any
>> alternatives to the problem (or acknowledge the problem), it makes it tough
>> to try to work out a resolution that is satisfactory to all (or even good
>> enough to most).
> 
> Don't be ridiculous, Brad.  I sent a (long) email explaining my
> decision.  It helps no one to pretend that you're being put upon and
> summarily dismissed.

I didn't say that I was summarily dismissed or put upon. I am saying that you are not now receptive to addressing my concerns, which you confirm in below when you say "I'm not likely to change anything at this point", below.

> You can respond to that email if you wish.  

And I will, but I've just been extremely busy with other things (including long hours at work), and haven't gotten into yet again.

> I will state up-front that
> I'm not likely to change anything at this point.  You've argued your
> points, I considered your argument, and in the end I rejected your
> proposal.  The archives show that I was very receptive and fair.
> 
> You cannot hold up the spec indefinitely because you disagree with one
> of my choices.  

I am certainly not trying to hold up the spec indefinitely. I would like to see it published too, but in a better version wrt radial gradients. It is not about just one of your choices. It is a sizable portion of radial gradients syntax. Linear gradients were made better through lengthy discussions, but radial gradients have not been subjected to the same amount of attention, and can be made better.

> The WG has given you two weeks to further argue your
> point.  After that, I will again press for LC.

And when you refuse to change anything during that time, as you've indicated is a likely outcome, I will press for radial gradients either being moved to CSS4, or changed to address my concerns. At that point, I might be outvoted, or I might not. But I hope that those voting will have considered my arguments before passing judgement.
Received on Friday, 7 October 2011 15:47:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:45 GMT