- From: Philippe Wittenbergh <ph.wittenbergh@l-c-n.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 10:46:48 +0900
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Jun 9, 2011, at 9:44 AM, Sylvain Galineau wrote: > It's important to note here that we are not just talking about static gradient > backgrounds but the animation of their value. It turns out there are number of > issues in those scenarios, of which this is one. Ok, I found back the issue with animation you are referring to > A safe - I think - working assumption is that CSS authors are very familiar > with top/right/bottom/left and the spatial relationship between them. The > question is whether the following would be natural to web authors: that > transitioning a linear gradient from 0deg to 90deg is equivalent on the keyword > side to going from bottom to left. (earlier in this thread) That is assuming that 0deg points up and 90deg points right-wards. Most designers I know are more familiar with the Photoshop gradients (0deg is right-wards). That point has been made by Brad, vocally. And I support him in this. I mean, I don't really see what the issue with animation or transition is. Philippe -- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com/
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2011 01:47:15 UTC