- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 18:05:01 -0700
- 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. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2010 01:05:54 UTC