- From: Oriol Brufau via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 12:34:02 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I think such a function should accept `<number>`s or `<dimension>`s, but only be valid when the value and the precision have the same type. The most reasonable default for an omitted precision parameter would be `1`. Then you can use `round(2.4)` but not `round(2.4px)`. At first glance it can seem that a `1px` precision would be good for `round(2.4px)`, but would people still expect `1px` for `round(2.4cm)`, or would they expect `1cm`? What about `round(2.4cm + 3.5lh)` or `round(2.4deg + 3.5rad)`? To avoid confusion, for dimensions I think it's better to require the precision like `round(2.4px, 1px)`. Authors could also do the math with numbers and add the unit at the end: `calc(round(2.4) * 1px)` -- GitHub Notification of comment by Loirooriol Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2513#issuecomment-565426050 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 13 December 2019 12:34:04 UTC