- From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 21:47:59 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Ok, so your concern is whether we should change how the angle syntax renders? Because "strictly corner-to-corner or side-to-side" is all that CSS3 Gradients keywords have represented since I've started looking at the EDs/WDs. My proposal was to produce the "magic rendering" by mapping the side and corner keyword syntax to an angle appropriate for the ratio of the associated box, and then rendering *exactly* with the angle algorithm that's already documented in the spec. Presumably I'm missing something w/r/t your consternation. -Brian -----Original Message----- From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tab Atkins Jr. Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:41 PM To: Brian Manthos Cc: Brad Kemper; fantasai; www-style list Subject: Re: magic corner gradient revisited On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com> wrote: > Tab: >>On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com> wrote: >>> Ok, well for that case at least, I believe the two algorithms produce the same result. >>Well, they do in the simple case of corner-to-corner. In other cases they may be different. > > Now I'm confused again. > > What's an example of a less-simple corner-to-corner case supported by any current or previously discussed CSS gradient syntax? I meant any gradient that's not either strictly corner-to-corner or side-to-side; anything with an angle other than those 8, or with a start/endpoint not exactly lined up with the side/corner. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 21:48:30 UTC