- From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 17:48:47 +0200
- To: Maniac <Maniac@SoftwareManiacs.Org>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Maniac schreef: >> Eh? Surely everybody knows that if 0 degrees is top-bottom then 90 >> degrees is right-left? And that 45 is something inbetween? > > Yes. But 45 is not what you need to specify gradient for a non-sqaure > rectangle. Keywords 'ul-br' and 'bl-ur' mean straight line from corner > to corner, no matter how many degrees is this for a given rectangle. > They don't mean just 45 or -45. Okay, I see your point :). In that case, I prefer to just limit the gradients to top-bottom and left-right, and not do angles at all. As said, that will probably account for 99% of the cases that people would use it anyway. >> - Has using keywords in a ‘function’ got precedent? It seems odd. > > Then don't make it function, it doesn't matter. Let's make it like this: > > background-gradient-colors:blue white; > background-gradient-direction:ul-br; > > And use it in a shorthand: > > gradient:blue white ul-br; The advantage of having it as a function is that it doesn’t just apply to backgrounds, but to borders and colors as well. >> Frankly, either is fine with me. > > Then why choose? Let's specify gradient-direction both in helpful > keywords and flexible degrees. Like 'background-position' currently does. Yeah, that’s true, that’s possible as well. There’s one problem with all this by the way: in most cases, it isn’t incrementally renderable. ~Grauw -- Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!!
Received on Monday, 15 August 2005 15:49:44 UTC