W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2010

Re: [css3-images] Linear gradients feedback

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 18:05:01 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimfFVVqpw97p=kV3PiGsFtKiBMCpZS0--e-Kf91@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 5:41 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
> On Sep 7, 2010, at 12:41 , Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:33 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>>> Why aren't we using the grammar at the bottom of
>>>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Aug/0232.html
>>> ? I think that's much more straightforward.
>> Except for using a comma instead of "to", that's what I'm looking at
>> right now.  We just want to split the angle case out into a separate
>> function, and need a name for it.  I think I'll just use
>> angle-gradient() until someone gives me something better.
> I thought I had.
> You can't contrast radial-gradient with angle-gradient, because the latter is actually a linear-gradient.  And having a third called linear-gradient would be even more confusing.  Which is why I suggested
> radial-gradient
> linear-box-gradient
> linear-angle-gradient
> wordy as they are.

It's that wordiness that makes me not particularly like them.  ^_^
Just typing out linear-gradient() is already painfully long to me.
And demoting just the angle gradient to a second-class citizen with a
three-word name isn't very appealing either.

Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2010 01:05:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:49:47 UTC