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 20:15:15 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=9NrSSydy3=uBWh+Hwfb4UgO8rzo=+q6u6OccP@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:59 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> And you'd rather use a comma than "to"? I think it's clearer to use "to"
> since we're separating the colors with commas.

I prefer commas because it's more consistent, and it's how nearly
every programming language does functions, particularly javascript.

> While we're at it, the use of a comma to separate the geometry from the
> colors also bothers me for the same reason.
> How about
>  linear-gradient(<position> [to <position>]? as <color>, <color>, ...)
> ?

That seems even worse to me.  ^_^

> If the problem is DOM access, why not define different interfaces for
> them (LinearBoxGradient and LinearAngleGradient), but leave the parsed
> syntax the same?

That's smfr's call.  What do you think, Simon?  Would that be sufficient?

Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2010 03:16:07 UTC

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