RE: magic corner gradient revisited

I think it's a reasonable argument to say (versus the Feb WD) "while we're changing the coordinate system so that 0deg is up and changing the keyword syntax such that it's a direction as well, it's reasonable to change the default to 'to top'".

I agree with Florian that aligning with 0deg is a better initial value, and with Brad that now's the time to change it if we ever want to.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Tab Atkins Jr.
> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 9:08 AM
> To: Brad Kemper
> Cc: Florian Rivoal; www-style@w3.org
> Subject: Re: magic corner gradient revisited
> 
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Aug 9, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> >> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> It may be omitted; if so, it defaults to "to bottom".
> >>>
> >>> I am somewhat uncomfortable with having the direction when
> everything is
> >>> omitted be different from 0 deg, but the current wording makes it
> equivalent
> >>> to 180 deg.
> >>
> >> That's been the behavior for forever.  I based it off the fact that
> >> the plurality of linear gradients on the web were vertical, and it
> >> seemed most natural to have the colors start at the top rather than
> >> the bottom.  I'd rather not change it unless there's a very good
> >> reason.
> >
> > Given that 0deg = up, it does seem more intuitive that the default
> direction should be 'to top', which is still vertical. I agree that it
> seems more natural to start at the top, but only in the same way that
> it seems more natural to me to say 'from top' than 'to bottom' (start
> with an edge and move towards the other edge). But if we don't have
> 'from top' syntax, then it is no longer natural to have 'to bottom' be
> the default. And now is the best time to change it, since the syntax is
> changing too (less breakage if there are prefixed versions changing).
> 
> All right, I'll bring this up at the call tomorrow as one of the final
> gradient issues.
> 
> ~TJ
>

Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2011 17:49:53 UTC