- From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:34:26 +0000
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
[1] I disagree. Until the new before/after/start/end keywords were injected during the TeleCon, I was under the impression we were ready to move to WD and quickly to LC. Brad, Tab, and I were on the same page at that point -- or so I thought. [Minor editorial issues aside, I believe it was the 1.144 draft here: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css3-images/Overview.src.html .] [2] By design. It's not designed to reimplement every possible syntax, or replace svg, etc. That's my understanding at least. [3] By design, see comment on [2]. [4] Incorrect. There are multiple ways to address adding new fancy syntax in the future. Such as... background-image: linear-gradient-named-parameters(...); [5] My recommendation here is to propose some new syntax rules -- potentially available to all CSS properties -- that allow for naming the parameters. If done cleverly, it might be extendable to shorthands as well. Perhaps it's as simple as reserving colon (:) in parameter lists for functional syntax properties as a way of specifying which parameter is being set. As long as the chosen syntax was explicitly invalid before these new syntax rules, there's no conflict / future-reliability issue. [6] That sounds interesting for CSS4 (or later) consideration. But let's not sacrifice CSS3 for it. [7] We already can, see [4] and [5] comments. [8] Looks like we agree on my comments to [5]. That doesn't imply we should rewrite (existing) or stall (pre-CR) properties that you find this alternative syntax useful for. [9] There are many people to thank. Many of them only chime in rarely with "hey, shouldn't we use a better rendering like this __". ;) > -----Original Message----- > From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Andrew Fedoniouk > Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 12:10 AM > To: www-style@w3.org > Subject: [css3-images] design of gradients and use of functions in CSS > in general. > [1] > Looking on discussions around gradients in CSS I came up to conclusion > that > so high volume > of issues and flames about it now will never lead to something solid in > [nearest] future. > [2] > Problems as I see them: > > 1. Chosen notation (function alike) is non-flexible and not adequate to > the > task of > defining such complex and multi-variant entity. [3] > 2. linear-gradient() covers only small subset of useful gradient cases. > radial-gradient() > is in better shape but still not complete. > [4] > If we will accept the spec in the way it is written now we will > probably > solve some > basic use cases but will create solution that will not be extendable in > future due to > #1 - bad, non-extendable notation. > [5] > Style definition as a collection of name/value pairs is "future- > reliable" as > we can extend > set of properties without changing others. And gradient definition > should > use something > like this as it is actually also a collection of orthogonal properties > that > define bunch of > different color distribution functions. > [6] > I would suggest to consider functions with named arguments in CSS, > something > like this: > > gradient( type:linear, > color-stops: red yellow green, > from: top left ); > [7] > This will allow to define what we want at the moment and to extend > gradients > in future. > [8] > In fact gradients are not the only things that require such extended > function notation. > Various layout methods - values of 'flex-flow' are better to be > definable as > such > functions. Each flow may have its own and specific set of sub- > properties - > it > is better to do not pollute main style properties name space. We are > actually very > close to the limit of meaningful names - we have at multiple properties > with > **-rows and **-columns names. They cannot be applied at the same time > - > so they better to be sub-properties: > > flow: columns( column-widths: ... ; ruler: ... ) > flow: template( 1 2, 4 3 ); > flow: horizontal(dir:rtl); > > and so on. > [9] > Brad did tremendous job with css3-images spec. We now better understand > the > problem. But means of implementation of the idea are not adequate. > > > -- > Andrew Fedoniouk > > http://terrainformatica.com > >
Received on Friday, 12 August 2011 20:34:54 UTC