- From: Lea Verou via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 22:15:17 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
My 2 cents: Indeed, `frames()` is much more intuitive than `steps()`, both in terms of naming and functionality. I don’t see any issue with collisions with `requestAnimationFrame` or `@keyframes`, by that logic `requestAnimationFrame` collides with the `<frame>` tag! However, we can't rename `steps()`, and having two very similar functions seems worse from a usability pov. So I would vote for extending the second parameter of `steps()` to cover the current definition of `frames()`. No strong opinions about the name of that parameter, but `justify` made the most sense to me. It's unfortunate we cannot make this the default. 😢 `frames()` is also a very animation-centric name, which could prove a problem down the road. In fact, [I've suggested](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1577) that the entire spec needs to be renamed and reworded to be more about generic interpolation and less animation-specific. -- GitHub Notification of comment by LeaVerou Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1301#issuecomment-313241927 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 5 July 2017 22:15:23 UTC