Re: [css3-images] Resolving on gradient issues

On 5/08/2011 1:28 PM, Brian Manthos wrote:
> On 5/08/2011, Alan Gresley wrote:
>> On 5/08/2011 3:45 AM, Brian Manthos wrote:

>>> Background-repeat has a specific meaning and capabilities.
>>
>> Brad is talking about 'repeating-linear-gradient' looking odd when
>> the background tile is not rotated. To achieved that, you need to
>> rotate the background tile but then that bring up the new issue of
>> how keywords work for rotated background tiles along with how they
>> are used (will be used) with keywords with gradients.
>
> You're reading more into it than what he said.  That may be what he
> meant, but it's not what he said.


Brain, do you remember this thread?

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011May/0321.html


There are a few other threads where I mentioned the possibility of the 
rotation of the background tile and in some of these threads, I 
mentioned Brad's use case.


Not this,

|/ / / / /|
| / / / / |
|/ / / / /|
| / / / / |
|/ / / / /|


but this.

     / -
    / / / -
   / / / / / -
  / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / /
  - / / / / /
     - / / /
        - /



> I don't see repeating-linear-gradient as a way of simulating
> background-repeat.


Neither do I.


> It's a variation on linear-gradient with its own
> behavior.  The fact that some flavors of linear-gradient +
> background-repeat combinations look similar to
> repeating-linear-gradient is perhaps interesting, but doesn't suggest
> or imply that they are designed to suit the same needs.


I agree. This discussion is not about removing 'repeating-*-gradient'. 
For me, the issue is about confusing gradient 'keywords' if there is a 
future property named 'background-rotate'.



-- 
Alan Gresley
http://css-3d.org/
http://css-class.com/

Received on Friday, 5 August 2011 06:06:20 UTC