W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > December 2016

[csswg-drafts] [css-shapes-1] ellipse() grammar gratuitously inconsistent with radial-gradient()

From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 01:28:04 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.opened-196823636-1482283683-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
tabatkins has just created a new issue for 
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-shapes-1] ellipse() grammar gratuitously inconsistent with 
radial-gradient() ==
The [`ellipse()` grammar defined in 
Shapes](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-shapes-1/#funcdef-ellipse) was 
clearly designed to *resemble* [the grammar of 
radial-gradient()](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-images-3/#funcdef-radial-gradient),
 but it's different in small but important ways, for no apparent 
reason.

In particular, the ellipse part of the `radial-gradient()` grammar is:
 `<extent-keyword> | <length-percentage>{2}`.  You either say 
something like "farthest-side", which defines an ellipse, or give 
lenpers for both axises.

On the other hand, the `ellipse()` function says `[ <extent-keyword> |
 <length-percentage> ]{2}?` - for *each axis*, you can either provide 
a keyword or a lenper. So you can do something like 
`ellipse(farthest-side closest-side)`, to make its width the amount 
necessary to hit the farthest horizontal side, and its height the 
amount necessary to hit the closest vertical side.  But you *can't* do
 `ellipse(closest-side)`.

Given the seniority of the `radial-gradient()` syntax, and the lack of
 major issues with it, I think we should converge on that as the 
grammar for `ellipse()`.

Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/824 using your GitHub 
account
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2016 01:28:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 19 October 2021 01:30:27 UTC