- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 16:35:20 +0900
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 7, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com> wrote: >> Paraphrasing [1]: >> When specified via angle, the angle can be understood as both the direction >> ("toward the <angle>") and the ending point ("ends at <angle>"). >> >> Paraphrasing [2] and [3]: >> When specified via keyword, the keyword can be understood as both opposite >> direction ("away from the <keyword(s)>") and the starting point ("starts at >> <keyword>"). >> >> Is it intentional that these two ways of specifying gradient-line are >> opposite? > > I don't think they are. In [1], the angle determines the starting AND ending > points. In [2] and [3], the ending point (and thus the direction) is > determined by the starting point. I see no inconsistency. This was brought up during the ftf, and I think it's a valid point. In my head (and I expect in others'), when I think of what angle to use for a gradient I do so by imagining a compass rose, with 0deg at the top, 90deg to the right, etc. I then set the gradient angle by choosing which angle I want the gradient to point toward. Similarly, if I imagine keywords, I do so with 'top' at the top, 'right' at the right, etc. Now, though, I have to reverse how I deal with my mental image - if I want the gradient to point up, I don't choose 'top', I choose 'bottom'. I'm not sure if this is an important enough disconnect to justify changing the keywords, but we brainstormed it a bit at the ftf. I don't think we came up with any set of directional keywords that was sufficiently decent to work as replacements, though. If anyone has any suggestions, please speak up! The current front-runner is 'upward'/'rightward'/etc, which isn't very good. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 07:36:17 UTC