- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 09:35:56 -0700
- To: "David Perrell" <davidp@hpaa.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>, "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
On Aug 15, 2009, at 8:11 AM, David Perrell wrote: > Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > | I'm still not sure how you're justifying gradients being the same as > | colors. They're not, in any way, as I, Brad, and several others in > | other circumstances have said. They're an image. > > Consensus can be illogical. True. > There are many cases where application of both background linear- > gradient and background-image would be useful; True. Multiple backgrounds takes care of that. > there are none where background-color and linear-gradient would need > to apply simultaneously. I think you are forgetting about 'background-size', which can make the gradient image smaller than the area that the color fills. Then you can use background-repeat, background-position, etc. (which ROC mentioned earlier in a thread where I thought he was arguing for something completely different from what he actually was).
Received on Saturday, 15 August 2009 16:36:36 UTC