- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 08:41:11 -0700
- To: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Cc: Rafal Chlodnicki <rchlodnicki@opera.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Aug 9, 2011, at 8:25 AM, Alan Gresley wrote: > On 10/08/2011 12:46 AM, Rafal Chlodnicki wrote: >> On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 07:25:23 +0200, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Aug 4, 2011, at 8:28 PM, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com> wrote: >>>> Further, Brad wrote: >>>>> And there already is very little need/demand for >>>>> 'repeating-radial-gradient'. >>>> >>>> I believe quite the opposite. The current repeating-radial-gradient >>>> provides capabilities that can't be simulated with background-repeat >>>> or any other properties without significant shenanigans. >>> >>> My point was that we already have a familiar way of repeating things >>> in backgrounds, and even with 'repeating-linear-gradient' available in >>> prefixed versions, authors seem to greatly prefer using >>> background-repeat and background-size instead, as I predicted. That is >>> my impression from looking at the code of many of the samples that Lea >>> Verou has showcased [1]. >>> >>> You don't need shenanigans to get there. If we had 'background-rotate' >>> to rotate the background canvas, you would even need a magic 'auto' >>> value to deal with gradients. You could just set them to 'from bottom' >>> (or whatever that will be called), and then set 'background-rotate' to >>> some number of deg. >> >> How would you do such gradient without specifying all that repeating >> stops manually: >> >> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/repeating3.png >> >> ? > > > Brad is talking about repeating-linear-gradient and not repeating-radial-gradient. He has a demo here. > > > http://bradclicks.com/cssplay/Gradient_Tiled_BG/index.html > > > This is not the below background tile moving either along the x or y axis, > > > |/ / / / /| /|\ > | / / / / | | > |/ / / / /| Y > | / / / / | | > |/ / / / /| \|/ > > > <----X----> > > > > but the below background tile moving on a rotated x or y axis. > > > / - > / / / - > / / / / / - > / / / / / / / > / / / / / / / /| > - / / / / / / > - / / / / > |\__ - / / > \__ |/ > \| Right. And really it would be the whole background canvas layer that rotated. Sorry I missed that post by Rafel. My view on repeating radial gradients is that they were just introduced in order to have spec symmetry with repeating linear gradients, and not because there was any actual need for them from authors.
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2011 15:41:42 UTC