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

Re: [css3-background] color transition line

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:28:09 -0800
Message-ID: <4F168299.3070905@inkedblade.net>
To: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 01/17/2012 10:27 PM, Brian Manthos wrote:
>
> 2. "Complaining" and "expressing concern" are two different things.  It's a nuance I grant, but sometimes an important one.  If you don't want feedback, don't ask for it.  If you do want feedback, don't choose negatively biased words in your follow-up responses; doing so is counterproductive.

Fair enough.

> 3. Actually, it is being changed.  Elaborating...

No, not really. I could have left that sentence alone and written
a separate one undefining the behavior defined by the sentence
being removed. The shape of the transition (always undefined) and
its position (previously defined) are two separate things.

> Current text:
> # It is not defined what these transitions look like.
>
> Proposed text:
> # However it is not defined what these transitions look like
> # or how "proportional" maps to a point on the curve.
>
>
> You're proposing to expand what is officially undefined.  This is part of what I'm concerned with.
>
> I'm presuming you have a goal of being more accommodating of what you consider multiple valid renderings for current browsers to allow the spec to progress and/or capture current state of affairs.  I don't think it's unreasonable to see what you're seeing (i.e. examples) so that we can help you evaluate if the proposed changes are broad enough (enhanced conformance of existing implementations) while remaining acceptably confining (excluding absurd implementation results).

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2011Jul/0005.html

Currently the only correct option is the third one (t17-ray).
The goal is
   - to have both the first (IE's interpretation) and the fourth
     (preferred by all the actual authors I've asked) be conforming,
     as well as allowing gradient transitions to be conforming
   - to meanwhile require that if a border is missing on one
     side, the entire curve is rendered with the color and style of
     the other side
   - and also require that if the border widths are changed, the
     rendering result is reasonably continuous*

* it might not be entirely continuous because as more or less dots
   or dashes fit, there will be discontinuities in the rendering as
   they are added/removed

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 08:28:49 GMT

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