- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:08:09 -0500
- To: www-style CSS <www-style@w3.org>
Hey- David Hyatt wrote (on 12/10/2007 2:58 AM): > > Yeah, we've been toying with the idea of adding gradients to WebKit and > had settled on pretty much exactly this syntax. I think gradients > should be part of CSS, and that requiring SVG is overkill. I'm actually inclined to agree, and sent an email to the SVG WG to that effect, for discussion at tomorrow's telcon. Gradients are just a fill (even in SVG), and with a simple fill such as is proposed, I see no reason it can't be defined natively in CSS. Obviously, it's best if it's defined in a way that's compatible to SVG, so authors only have to learn one model (even if it's a different syntax). Both linear and radial gradients should be fairly simple to define as a fill. The color value should perhaps be RGBA to allow for opacity (note that this may be slightly incompatible with SVG's color model, which uses a separate opacity presentation property/attribute, but I expect there would a one-to-one match in most typical color spaces). That the SVG WG has been collaborating with the developers of Inkscape to design a more advanced gradient, something like a mesh. I expect that this would be harder to define in CSS, but I'm not sure it's strictly necessary to do so; CSS could simply have a subset of SVG's gradient functionality, and if the author needed more, they could use the more involved X/HTML+SVG+CSS combination. Again, I haven't discussed this yet with the SVG WG, but on the face of it, I see no serious impediments should there be interest in the CSS WG to take this up. I would ask that the SVG WG be involved in the discussions so we don't trip over one another and complicate things for both authors and implementors. Regards- -Doug Schepers W3C Staff Contact, SVG, CDF, and WebAPI
Received on Monday, 10 December 2007 14:08:19 UTC