Re: Linear gradients, Transforms and angles...

On Sep 26, 2010, at 7:42 AM, Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com> wrote:

> 
> On Sep 22, 2010, at 11:58 PM, Daniel Glazman wrote:
> 
>> Le 23/09/10 01:36, David Singer a écrit :
>> 
>>> I think users want rotations (transforms) and gradients to be consistent -- that two, at 45º, go the same way.  They want to learn one, well-defined, coordinate space, not have to remember that there are two somewhat intuitive, but different, conventions at work depending on what they are working with.
>> 
>> And that's the whole point of my original message: it's not
>> the case today.
> 
> Oh, oh. Wait, which side are you arguing. It's true that it's not consistent today. Gradients go counter-clockwise,

By "go clockwise", you mean the reference numbering of the linear directions start at zero pointing to the right, and proceed counterclockwise. 

> everything else goes clockwise.

Rotations do not have this reference numbering, as they do not need a reference to a zero degree direction, or of any of the other static, linear directions. They only need to know which circular direction to rotate with positive numbers, something which linear gradients don't do (unless you animate or transition them).

So there is no inconsistency. They both use a directionless measure of arc to indicate completely separate things, just as a positive distance measurement can be used to indicate different directions for "margin-right" and "margin-left".  


> So the correct solution is to make gradients go clockwise, right?

I know you weren't asking me, but the correct solution is to just be clear about how these measurements of arc are applied to different operations.

Received on Sunday, 26 September 2010 16:04:34 UTC