- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:11:22 -0700
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Aug 19, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: > Brad Kemper wrote: >> On Aug 18, 2009, at 11:28 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: >>> background-color: linear-gradient( >>> start:0% 0%, >>> stop: 100% 100%, >>> color-stop: 0% white, >>> color-stop: 50% red , >>> color-stop: 100% blue ); >> I think that is way too verbose. > > But human readable and machine parse-able. > > Proposed syntaxes I've seen so far in linear-gradient() are > not readable (that is subjective of course) and not > unambiguously parseable. > > That use of '/' as a some kind of separator with absolutely non-clear > grammatic nature is very bad. I'm strongly in favor of the more verbose, but much more human- readable form above. Compared to that, the current suggestions, like: linear-gradient(30px center / 50% / green -50%, wheat -30%, wheat 30%, green 50%) seem like complete voodoo. In these days of auto-completing editors and authoring tools, conciseness isn't necessarily the primary concern. I'm much rather have a syntax that I can type without having to look it up, and can quickly visually scan without having to count slashes. This gradient discussion has gone on a long time, and it feels like there's is premature convergence onto a very non human-friendly syntax. It's time to step back, summarize the conversation, and boil the proposals down to a few contenders. Simon
Received on Thursday, 20 August 2009 16:12:05 UTC