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

Re: [css3-images] comments on radial gradients

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:07:55 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDASPAFUPN-RtsaHJ1s+ybiy+H5=zrbY1qNJ0x02yvUugw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:48 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> In section 4.2.2 (Placing Color Stops),
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#radial-color-stops :
>
>  Change axises -> axes

I am morally opposed to Latin-inspired irregular pluralization
introduced a century ago, when the regular form is still clear
English.

In other words, I'd like to assert editorial privilege over the
spellings used in the document.


> In section 4.2.3 (Degenerate Radial Gradients),
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#degenerate-radials :
>
>  The first heading should probably say "a circle with zero radius"
>  rather than "a circle with zero width or height".  In its
>  non-normative text, it should probably also mention (like the
>  second heading does) that all color-stop positions specified with
>  a percentage resolve to 0px.

Done.


> In section 4.3 (Repeating gradients),
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#repeating-gradients :
>
>  I think this section ought to be clearer about how negative color
>  stops are handled for repeating radial gradients.  The rules for
>  repeating in this section seem to contradict the earlier statement
>  that positions less than 0 have no effect on rendering in radial
>  gradients, since direct application of the repeating rules seems
>  to make them take up space and render.

Why isn't this handled by the existing text?  "When rendered, however,
the color-stops are repeated infinitely in both directions, with their
positions shifted by multiples of the difference between the last
specified color-stop's position and the first specified color-stop's
position."

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2012 22:08:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 03:48:51 GMT