Re: [css3-images] Resolving on gradient issues

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Brad Kemper <> wrote:
> On Aug 4, 2011, at 10:46 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Brad Kemper <> wrote:
>>> The other downside of punting on diagonals is that is makes 'downward', 'upward', etc. seem much more reasonable than they really are, because nobody then sees the awkward combinations for corners ('downward rightward', gaaaah!).
>> Whatever we end up doing for corner gradients, it will *not* be
>> "downward rightward".  Ugh.  Maybe it'll be startpoint/endpoint or
>> something, I dunno.
> So you will have the '*ward' syntax for going edge-to-edge, and some completely different syntax or wording style for going corner-to-corner? I think that is a horrible idea, and that we should resolve this now to get a syntax that is consistent for both. Trying to patch something on later without considering how now will lead to bad results.

Not just for corner-to-corner.  For the more general case of "whatever
the new type of linear gradient is".  The *ward keywords are just
shortcuts for an angle (with a little bit of special behavior on
animation).  Whatever future type of linear gradient we design will
handle corner-to-corner better, and will almost certainly be able to
handle horizontal/vertical gradients as well.

>>> P.S. "down" and "up" are already directions that are not confused with positions, and don't need 'wards' added to them.
>> Agreed, but "down" and "leftward" look slightly odd together.  I made
>> them all "-ward" to avoid confusion.
> Too late: I'm confused. You just said they wouldn't be used together.

Sorry, I meant in the syntax.  Imagine looking at this:

linear-gradient( <angle> | up | rightward | down | leftward );

That just looks extremely confusing.


Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 19:26:44 UTC