 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit</link>
	<description>Thoughts on web development and technologies by Peter Gasston</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:25:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: nemo</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-37217</link>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Apr 2010 17:02:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-37217</guid>
		<description>FWIW, the color problem reported above still seems to exist.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW, the color problem reported above still seems to exist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Un effet de gradient en CSS3 &#124; Blog de Johan BLEUZEN</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-36478</link>
		<dc:creator>Un effet de gradient en CSS3 &#124; Blog de Johan BLEUZEN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 09:54:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-36478</guid>
		<description>[...] la syntaxe des gradients pour Firefox et Webkit, je vous conseille cet excellent post sur le blog Broken-links.  Post&#233; dans CSS3  &#124;  Tags : CSS3, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[…] la syntaxe des gradients pour Firefox et Webkit, je vous conseille cet excellent post sur le blog Broken-links.  Posté dans CSS3  |  Tags : CSS3, […]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CSS gradients for all web browsers, without using images - Robert&#39;s talk</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-36429</link>
		<dc:creator>CSS gradients for all web browsers, without using images - Robert&#39;s talk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:04:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-36429</guid>
		<description>[...] are two great articles on this topic, delver deeper into the syntax differences: CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit and CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit (Part [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[…] are two great articles on this topic, delver deeper into the syntax differences: CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit and CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit (Part […]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nemo</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-36415</link>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 01:06:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-36415</guid>
		<description>Aye. I chatted with him.  He was of opinion the new proposal was too restrictive, but fact is, everything he challenged me to do w/ Firefox syntax I did w/ only a few minutes effort.

And, yes, it requires using things like multiple background-images, background-size, background-position, background-clip etc.

I see no problem w/ that.  Having a gradient syntax that repeats things you can already do w/ other parts of background-* seems rather redundant.

Anyway.  Whatever their concerns are, hopefully they don&#039;t change the core of the syntax.  We&#039;ve been finding the new proposal way way more useful than the old syntax.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aye. I chatted with him.  He was of opinion the new proposal was too restrictive, but fact is, everything he challenged me to do w/ Firefox syntax I did w/ only a few minutes effort.</p>
<p>And, yes, it requires using things like multiple background-images, background-size, background-position, background-clip etc.</p>
<p>I see no problem w/ that.  Having a gradient syntax that repeats things you can already do w/ other parts of background-* seems rather redundant.</p>
<p>Anyway.  Whatever their concerns are, hopefully they don’t change the core of the syntax.  We’ve been finding the new proposal way way more useful than the old syntax.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-36413</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 23:33:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-36413</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the feedback, nemo. TBH my comments form needs to be properly re-designed, but I&#039;ve added the color into the stylesheet to fix the problem you mentioned.

You&#039;re right about the WebKit syntax, it only allows a decimal or percentage value.

According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28152&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this bug report&lt;/a&gt; the WebKit team are looking at the new syntax but have one or two concerns.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the feedback, nemo. TBH my comments form needs to be properly re-designed, but I’ve added the color into the stylesheet to fix the problem you mentioned.</p>
<p>You’re right about the WebKit syntax, it only allows a decimal or percentage value.</p>
<p>According to <a href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28152" rel="nofollow">this bug report</a> the WebKit team are looking at the new syntax but have one or two concerns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nemo</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-36410</link>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:32:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-36410</guid>
		<description>BTW, your stylesheet specifies:

#commentform input[type=&quot;text&quot;]:focus, #commentform textarea:focus {
background-color:#FAEAE6;
}

without specifying a colour, so I get almost unreadable grey text on a pinkish background with my dark system theme.

For sites I visit a great deal I override bad behaviour in stylish, but it&#039;d be nice if you fixed it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW, your stylesheet specifies:</p>
<p>#commentform input[type=“text”]:focus, #commentform textarea:focus {<br />
background-color:#FAEAE6;<br />
}</p>
<p>without specifying a colour, so I get almost unreadable grey text on a pinkish background with my dark system theme.</p>
<p>For sites I visit a great deal I override bad behaviour in stylish, but it’d be nice if you fixed it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nemo</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-36409</link>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:30:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-36409</guid>
		<description>Here&#039;s a major issue I have with Webkit&#039;s syntax.

I have the following on my website:
background-image: url(images/background.jpeg), -moz-linear-gradient(#92dbd6, #077582 1152px, #022228);

The intent of this is to provide a gradient from #92dbd6 to #077582 while a 1152px background image loads, and continue from the #077582 final colour on the backgroudn image down to #022228 to offer a seamless shading to dark.

This is, as far as I can tell, impossible in the webkit syntax.
It is a shame since this is a real world example I could use immediately.  In Safari or IE, you simply see the background colour of #077582 so the image seems to shade to that on long pages.

In theory I can use background-position and only:
-webkit-gradient(linear, left, left bottom, from(#077582),to(#022228))
That would offer nothing while the image loads, but at least offer a gradient.

*however* webkit has ditched -webkit-background-position and -webkit-background-position-x

So if I did that I&#039;d screw up firefox, which seems quite unfair.

I also tried:
background: url(images/background.jpeg) top left repeat-x, -webkit-gradient(linear,left top, left bottom, from(#077582), to(#022228)) 1152px left repeat-x / 100% 100%;

Which seems to me to be how the CSS3 spec example says to do a combined background - my theory was firefox and other browsers would simply throw out this rule due to the -webkit

However webkit ignores this rule too.

So, my site remains linear-gradient free in webkit.

Basically it boils down to the webkit syntax only supporting percentages in stops, and not supporting pixels for the begin/end (I could do left 1152px, left bottom otherwise)

The Firefox syntax is far more flexible, I hope it becomes standard.

Same in radial gradients as I hope you discovered, with variable size boxes.  I had to ditch webkit radial gradiants on variable boxes &#039;cause they were also unusable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here’s a major issue I have with Webkit’s syntax.</p>
<p>I have the following on my website:<br />
background-image: url(images/background.jpeg), –moz-linear-gradient(#92dbd6, #077582 1152px, #022228);</p>
<p>The intent of this is to provide a gradient from #92dbd6 to #077582 while a 1152px background image loads, and continue from the #077582 final colour on the backgroudn image down to #022228 to offer a seamless shading to dark.</p>
<p>This is, as far as I can tell, impossible in the webkit syntax.<br />
It is a shame since this is a real world example I could use immediately.  In Safari or IE, you simply see the background colour of #077582 so the image seems to shade to that on long pages.</p>
<p>In theory I can use background-position and only:<br />
–webkit-gradient(linear, left, left bottom, from(#077582),to(#022228))<br />
That would offer nothing while the image loads, but at least offer a gradient.</p>
<p>*however* webkit has ditched –webkit-background-position and –webkit-background-position-x</p>
<p>So if I did that I’d screw up firefox, which seems quite unfair.</p>
<p>I also tried:<br />
background: url(images/background.jpeg) top left repeat-x, –webkit-gradient(linear,left top, left bottom, from(#077582), to(#022228)) 1152px left repeat-x / 100% 100%;</p>
<p>Which seems to me to be how the CSS3 spec example says to do a combined background — my theory was firefox and other browsers would simply throw out this rule due to the –webkit</p>
<p>However webkit ignores this rule too.</p>
<p>So, my site remains linear-gradient free in webkit.</p>
<p>Basically it boils down to the webkit syntax only supporting percentages in stops, and not supporting pixels for the begin/end (I could do left 1152px, left bottom otherwise)</p>
<p>The Firefox syntax is far more flexible, I hope it becomes standard.</p>
<p>Same in radial gradients as I hope you discovered, with variable size boxes.  I had to ditch webkit radial gradiants on variable boxes ’cause they were also unusable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan Hogan</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-36026</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan Hogan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 21:46:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-36026</guid>
		<description>I retract my previous complaint — mostly. I can get it &quot;good enough&quot; with an angle in my case. Interesting approach.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I retract my previous complaint — mostly. I can get it “good enough” with an angle in my case. Interesting approach.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max Design - standards based web design, development and training &#187; Some links for light reading (01/12/09)</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-35685</link>
		<dc:creator>Max Design - standards based web design, development and training &#187; Some links for light reading (01/12/09)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-35685</guid>
		<description>[...] CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[…] CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit […]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: uberVU - social comments</title>
		<link>http://www.broken-links.com/2009/11/26/css-gradient-syntax-comparison-of-mozilla-and-webkit/#comment-35637</link>
		<dc:creator>uberVU - social comments</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:06:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.broken-links.com/?p=624#comment-35637</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Social comments and analytics for this post...&lt;/strong&gt;

This post was mentioned on Twitter by stopsatgreen: New blog post: CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit http://bit.ly/6tyBAL/...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Social comments and analytics for this post…</strong></p>
<p>This post was mentioned on Twitter by stopsatgreen: New blog post: CSS gradient syntax: comparison of Mozilla and WebKit <a href="http://bit.ly/6tyBAL/.." rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/6tyBAL/..</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
