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

Re: [css4-images] Color stop syntax

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 05:17:45 +0200
Message-ID: <CAGN7qDDJT57vyrzq-psY7Y1HEWdY+qsz2vZJKPEWJTBTiQM=Yg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lea Verou <lea@w3.org>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
For people who don't know what the 'midpoint' is, it defines the points
between 2 gradient stops where the color is the average of the 2 colors.
Current gradients have this always defined at 50%, but PDF and Adobe's
applications (and probably most other graphical tools) allow you to move
 this point.

I've attached a simple example that shows how the midpoint changes the
rendering of a white-to-black gradient.

Rik

On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Lea Verou <lea@w3.org> wrote:

> Itís only a pair now, in the future it might be extended to allow for more
> things. For example, Rik Cabanier recently suggested in a discussion we had
> that it might be useful to allow an optional midpoint, like Adobe products
> traditionally supported. Of course, in that case, a specific relative order
> would be necessary, since they would both be of the same type.
>
> As an author, I find it easy to remember the order of values, but I find
> it even easier when I don't have to commit any order to memory. This might
> have to do with the way my memory works: I first learn the tokens I need to
> use, and then their order is an additional piece of information I need to
> store.
>
> My experience seems to be on par with what I hear from most other authors
> at conferences when this topic comes up. In fact, ever since I joined W3C
> and the CSSWG, they often bring it up themselves, to complain that a
> specific order is mandatory! When that happens, I explain that it's needed
> for disambiguation, which is also a useful way for them to remember when a
> specific order is necessary. However, disambiguation is not a problem here,
> so that mnemonic device goes to the trash.
>
> Having only two values doesn't seem to be an issue in shorthands: The
> columns [1] shorthand only accepts two values as well, but it accepts them
> in any order.
>
> I understand the arguments against allowing the position to be first, but
> I think flexibility and ease of recall is a higher goal than subjective
> readability. But that's just me :)
>
> [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-multicol/#columns
>
> On Sep 23, 2012, at 03:57, Brad Kemper wrote:
>
> > On Sep 22, 2012, at 2:45 AM, Lea Verou <lea@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Your arguments could apply to most CSS shorthands. Do you disagree with
> them as well?
> >> For example, background could easily have a "50% black" sequence.
> >
> > That's not the same. This is not a sequence of many different values as
> with background. It is a pair: a color and a length. It is more like saying
> "to top" instead of "top to".  I'm an author, and I find it pretty easy to
> remember the order when there are only two possibilities, and one is
> clearer than the other.
>
>
>


gradient_mid_point.png
(image/png attachment: gradient_mid_point.png)

Received on Monday, 24 September 2012 03:18:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:00 GMT