Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-transforms] Smarter interpolation of truncated transform lists

The CSS Working Group just discussed Smarter interpolation of truncated lists, and agreed to the following resolutions:

```
RESOLVED: Accept the issue as written.
```

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>

```
<dino> Topic: Smarter interpolation of truncated lists
<dino> Github Topic: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/927
<dino> smfr: we talked about this in seattle a bit. we suggested adding a special name that can match anything. e.g. identity or none.
<dino> smfr: should we add this to level 1?
<dino> smfr: there are some side-effects of not doing it - e.g. rotations greater than 360
<dino> smfr: i don't like that it is a behaviour change, so suggest deferring
<dino> TabAtkins: I'm ok with deferring any behaviour change
<dino> Rossen: there was a lot of discussion on this. Have you played with it?
<dino> smfr: we haven't implemented.
<dino> Rossen: what is the fear of compatibility risk?
<dino> smfr: they might get different animations
<dino> dbaron: since people have to manually write this, there is no compat risk
<dbaron> (assuming they do, at least)
<dino> smfr: this issue is also asking for magical matching (inserting identity transforms)
<dino> smfr: it's saying that it uses the common prefix for as much as possible, then smoosh together the rest into a matrix
<dino> dbaron: there is more compat risk there
<dino> dbaron: not sure how much interop there is here, since we've changed it a lot
<dino> TabAtkins: better behaviour would be nice, but yes there is a compat risk
<dino> smfr: could we change this behaviour in level 2?
<dino> Rossen: more risky
<dino> dbaron: if we want to change, do it in level 1
<dino> shane: there is a risk. i don't think it is a big issue though. i have no data to support it. we're talking about visual behaviour of an animation
<dino> shane: and this is a fallback behaviour that is now hopefully more closely matching the author intent
<dino> shane: i think this is only stopping messed up animations from looking messed up
<dino> birtles: it's hard to think of a case where it looks worse
<dino> smfr: so change the behaviour for Level 1? As the github issue suggests?
<dino> TabAtkins: that is the most reasonable way to intuit author preference here
<dino> smfr: right
<dino> <no one disagrees>
<dino> <wait.....>
<dino> dbaron: we'd be hesitant to be first implementation, but if everyone else agrees, then we're ok
<dino> Rossen: if we already resolved this, do we need to change anything?
<dino> smfr: i can't find it.
<dino> TabAtkins: i don't think we did
<dino> smfr: maybe we resolved this would be a L2 thing
<dino> Rossen: we can resolve it now
<dino> Rossen: objections?
<dino> <none>
<dino> RESOLVED: Accept the issue as written.
```
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/927#issuecomment-295513301 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 20 April 2017 00:37:52 UTC