- From: Jasper van de Gronde <th.v.d.gronde@hccnet.nl>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 18:49:01 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On 01/24/2014 05:48 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:48 AM, Jasper van de Gronde > <th.v.d.gronde@hccnet.nl> wrote: >> I once suggested generalizing radial gradients to also allow conical and/or >> "spiral" gradients. Essentially the idea is that radial gradients give you >> the radius part of polar coordinates, while conical gradients are >> essentially based on the angle part. A scheme that combines the two would >> allow for a kind of spiral gradient. > > Radial and conical gradients are "inverses" of each other in a sense, > and you don't want to try overloading a single syntax construct to do > both of them. > > (Radials position colors on a line, and color ellipses based on where > they touch the line. Conicals position colors on an ellipse, and > color lines based on where they touch the ellipse.) I wouldn't say they are each other's inverse exactly. To clarify, this was the original idea (with some examples): http://www.svgopen.org/2011/papers/20-Separating_gradients_from_geometry/#d4e65 As in that paper I used an increased separation of concerns it is not completely comparable to the current SVG spec, but the essence is that you can have a smooth (and useful) transition between, borrowing your terminology, having colours positioned on a line and having them positioned on an ellipse (line <-> spiral <-> ellipse). Whether in practice you want to create a spiral gradient is another matter of course, but since it would be relatively easy to define (and implement) a kind of "polar" gradient that encompasses radial, spiral /and/ conical gradients, it seems a shame not to at least consider it.
Received on Friday, 24 January 2014 17:49:29 UTC