W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2009

Re: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2009-08-12

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 10:15:19 +1200
Message-ID: <11e306600908131515j7d5b6ba0mf5930a8b889c5788@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't think that is what he meant, and it is not what I mean. He was
> talking in favor of functional notation within the value of his gradient
> property. I don't see any of what we've been mostly talking about as being a
> difference between me saying gradient should be a separate property (which
> is what Mozilla already has)

No, we currently use -moz-linear-gradient() and -moz-radial-gradient() as an
image type, i.e., in place of url(). And that is what I want.

"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
Received on Thursday, 13 August 2009 22:16:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:38 UTC