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

RE: [css3 images] WD gradients review notes

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 23:28:24 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9710FCC2E88860489239BE0308AC5D17159F45@TK5EX14MBXC266.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Tab:
>Brian:
>> B. My interpretation of this phrasing suggests that “negative distances” in
>> a linear gradient *are* displayed.  I’d like to see an example where that is
>> the case.
>
>The way that 0% and 100% points are calculated on a gradient, you
>never see anything beyond them currently.

Slight correction on this one...

For radial, you see colors beyond 100% except in the "cover" case.  Hence the focus on < 0% in my question.  :)

Tab:
>Brian:
>> My understanding is that gradient calc percentages resolve as follows …
>> D1. <color-stop> (all 4 flavors): percentages resolve relative to the length
>> of the gradient-line (segment)
>> D2. <angle> (both linear flavors): percentages invalid
>> D3. <position> (both radial flavors): match background-position behavior
>> D4. <length> (both radial flavors): the same as <percentage>
>> D5. <percentage> (both radial flavors): the same as without the calc()
>> wrapper
>Yes.  In all of those, calc(5%) is identical to 5%.

Ok, cool.  Good to see my thinking was on target.  Hopefully I can mentally map "calc(25% + 1em)" correctly as well.
Received on Thursday, 8 September 2011 23:28:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:44 GMT