Re: [css3-images] linear-gradient keywords and angles are opposite

I completely agree.
I made a similar proposal last December but was told the spec was too far
along.

A vector is much easier to define which probably why it is used in most
design software.

Rik

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Eric A. Meyer <eric@meyerweb.com> wrote:

> At 10:46 -0700 6/9/11, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>
>  On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>
>   And thus, finally, the root cause of the problem is obvious:  The spec as
>>> currently authored decided to choose "left/right the start location" instead
>>> of "left/right the direction".
>>>
>>
>> Yup, that's for historical reasons at this point - the first draft of
>> linear gradients I wrote let you specify an explicit start point and
>> end point for the gradient-line.  I stuck with that model as the
>> syntax mutated and simplified.
>>
>
>   I still prefer the idea of defining start and end points and having the
> gradient lines be perpendicular to the line described by those points.  It's
> fairly unambiguous, it lets authors use any angle at any point within (or
> even outside) the background area, and it avoids the whole keyword
> confusion.  And it seems really easy and clear to animate as well.
>   If we wanted to ensure the ability to use angles, then the syntax could
> be written so that an angle can be used for the second value. That would
> make the following equivalent:
>
>   linear-gradient: 50% 50%, 100% 0, black, white;
>   linear-gradient: 50% 50%, 45deg, black, white;
>
> (Assuming a "0deg is the top" coordinate system, obviously.)
>   And then if you wanted to animate so the gradient "rotated" to the upper
> left, you just animate the second value to '0 0' or '-45deg' or '315deg'.
>  Everything else stays the same.
>
> --
> Eric A. Meyer (eric@meyerweb.com)     http://meyerweb.com/
>
>