Le 7 juin 2013 à 01:28, Angela French a écrit :
> Seems like (top bottom, red, yellow) would make more sense, top being the
> start and bottom being the finish.
Ehhh… That is what many people on the CCS WG mailing list were saying at the
time the spec was changed to include the 'to'. The arg
9:23 AM
>To: Angela French; css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
>Subject: Re: [css-d] linear-gradient
>
>
>
>
>> So in my syntax, what is the "to" doing?
>>
>
>> >> background-image: linear-gradient(to bottom, red, yellow);
>> >>
>
>It
> So in my syntax, what is the "to" doing?
>
> >> background-image: linear-gradient(to bottom, red, yellow);
> >>
It basically means that the gradient is going from the top to bottom starting
red and finishing yellow.
You could also have something like this:
linear-gradient( to left top,
At 15:39 + 6/6/13, Angela French wrote:
So in my syntax, what is the "to" doing?
It's saying the the direction of the gradient ray points to the
bottom of the element. In other words, the gradient from from the
top TO the bottom. If you changed it to read:
background-image: lin
So in my syntax, what is the "to" doing?
>-Original Message-
>From: css-d-boun...@lists.css-discuss.org [mailto:css-d-boun...@lists.css-
>discuss.org] On Behalf Of Ben Henick
>Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 5:38 PM
>To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
>Subject:
On 6/5/13 4:57 PM, Angela French wrote:
background-image: linear-gradient(to bottom, red, yellow);
...What Barney C. said. But if you're a glutton for punishment, the
value syntax is as follows:
linear-gradient(angle|keyword, color1 stop1, color2 stop2, ...);
Angles are provided in the
This is one of those cases where the syntax is so convoluted and forked I
can never remember it myself — but when I don't have SASS at my disposal I
always go to this tool:
www.colorzilla.com/gradient-editor/
It even throws in IE filter and svg data-uri polyfills!
On Jun 5, 2013 10:58 PM, "Angela
