Re: [css3-images] Repeating oblique gradients

On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:52 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

>> My position is that even though most images are rectangles that are stamped out parallel to the page edges, generated gradients do not have to be stamped out in the same way. When background properties see that the image is a gradient, they can supress the angle direction from expressing within the image, and instead rotate the entire background layer in such a way that the final result is that the rendered direction of the gradient within the background is the same as it would be in other properties. Supposing that the image is repeating in the gradient direction, then 'background-size' would determine whether the entire background painting area is filled with gradient, or you just see an angled strip of gradient.
>> 
>> With this strategy, we eliminate the ugly versions of horizontal and vertical  rectangles tiles, avoid the need to expand the syntax of gradients, and allow authors to use what they already know for creating repeating patterns.
> 
> And eliminate the ability to create gradient tiles,

Why would it eliminate the ability to create gradient tiles? I don't see that at all. 

> which actually is
> kinda useful with radial gradients.  

I don't think that something we do for linear gradient tiles has to adversely affect radial gradients. Linear gradients have these two directions that would map nicely to the x and y of background-repeat: the gradient direction, and the perpendicular direction of the width of the gradient. I am not suggesting to do something like that to radials, as their main direction is outward, and you can't break radial repetitions into tiles, rotated or not. Is that what your beef with repeats vs. tiles is? I never intended to suggest that background-repeat do anything special for radial gradients. Check the subject line of this thread. 

> (I agree that there's no much use
> for diagonal linear gradient tiles - they're just ugly.)  For example,
> creating a background with a regular pattern of dots can be used with
> sized and tiled radial gradients.

Of course. My main suggested changes for radial gradients was a slight nuanced change to the meaning of 'cover' and 'contain' for background-size of radial gradients. But that is in a different thread. 

> I don't want to try and be "smart" here, and end up eliminating valid use-cases.

Nether do I, as long as they are not rare use cases that can still be worked around. But I agree that allowing an easy repeating grid of radial dots is more important than doing something special for a Loony Toons style of concentric repetitions.

Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 23:47:49 UTC