- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:15:32 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Received on Monday, 9 November 2009 03:16:46 UTC
On Nov 8, 2009, at 7:08 pm, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote: >> I think the points made need to be: >> * gradient images have no intrinsic size, >> * therefore they fill the box they are being rendered into (like >> SVG images >> with no intrinsic size) >> * and therefore, when applied to backrounds, background-size etc >> have no >> effect. > > We can actually be stronger about this - gradient images are infinite > in size (the abstract concept of 'box' used when describing their > rendering has no intrinsic size), and so background-size and > background-repeat have no effect. > > I will make this a bit clearer in the introduction to the section. But background-size does have an effect if given absolute length units: background-image: linear-gradient(yellow, blue); background-size: 50px 50px; will give you a 50x50px square containing the gradient, whose repeat behavior can then be controlled using background-repeat. I think this is a desirable behavior and we should keep it. > >> If you refer to the CSS 2.1 spec I think you should be more >> specific about >> which section you are referencing. > > Will do. Thanks Simon
Received on Monday, 9 November 2009 03:16:46 UTC