- From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 05:52:27 +0000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
With the variety of browsers we have available, there aren't easy to produce examples by just comparing the outputs of current versions of them? If that's the case, then I find it difficult to support the change since it doesn't seem to solve a problem. -Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net] > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 9:19 PM > To: Brian Manthos > Cc: www-style@w3.org > Subject: Re: [css3-background] color transition line > > On 01/17/2012 09:05 PM, Brian Manthos wrote: > >> However it is not defined what these > >> transitions look like or how "proportional" maps to a point on the > >> curve. > > > > I'm not sure what I think about this part because I'm having trouble > visualizing. > > > > Can you provide two sample renderings for the same markup where both > are conformant with the proposed text but one would become non- > conformant if we defined "what the transition looks like"? > > This part of the text hasn't changed since we first went to CR. > > No, I'm not going to draw pictures for you. Please use your imagination > instead: > - for color transitions, a sudden color change vs. conical gradient > - for style renderings, the transition of dots to solid or the > transition of double to solid. A sharp, diagonal transition at > the corner looks really bad for dots to solid, because a circular > dot doesn't extend to the corner -- this is why Zack's suggested > rendering has the solid border take up the whole corner. A curved > transition from double to solid could be done gradually rather > than suddenly. > > ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 05:53:06 UTC