W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

RE: [css3-images] Fwd: CSS Gradient Notation

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 04:57:55 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Robert Biggs <rbiggs@ymail.com>
Message-ID: <9710FCC2E88860489239BE0308AC5D170EB01A54@TK5EX14MBXC266.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
That fact that we're still talking about it shows that it was.

-Brian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 5:06 PM
> To: fantasai
> Cc: www-style@w3.org; Robert Biggs
> Subject: Re: [css3-images] Fwd: CSS Gradient Notation
> 
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 5:01 PM, fantasai
> <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> > On 01/17/2012 02:51 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> >> The "to" keyword was added to linear gradients because there was
> >> significant confusion about whether "top" meant "start from the top
> >> (put the 0% color on the top)" or "point toward the top (put the
> 100%
> >> color on the top)".
> >
> > I dispute the "significant".
> 
> We had polls on the matter at the time, and the results should be in
> the archives.  Draw what conclusions you will from them, but the group
> resolved that the "to" was okay.
> 
> ~TJ
> 

Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 04:58:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:48 GMT