- From: Martin <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:51:04 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Maybe I'm just being dyslexic, but I'm having trouble matching up the keywords with the graphs. Do we have a list of updated graphics that we can put the new names under them to get a feel of this? I'd also agree with Brians' last email regarding keeping it in name to the steps as the function name implies to avoid the dual context issue. I think documentation and a little explanatory tool would help make it easy for people to digest and make the connection in their heads with. (My favourite is the self-aware border radius tool :) https://s.codepen.io/zadvorsky/debug/mJQWzQ ) On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 at 06:17 Brian Birtles <notifications@github.com> wrote: > I suspect I'm forgetting something really obvious here but I wonder if > maybe we should stop trying to be clever by having frames(n) where n is > the number of frames. Maybe we should just let n continue to be the > number of steps (i.e. changes in value) and add the distribute and justify > keywords to describe how the steps are aligned within the interval (much > like start and end do). > > If we do that frames(2) would become steps(1, distribute). Likewise, > frames(4) would be steps(3, distribute). > > steps(1, justify) probably equals steps(1, distribute). > > — > You are receiving this because you commented. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1301#issuecomment-310277916>, > or mute the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHPBA9SJgohoPdX-_06QKxB2YwSuxeVMks5sGfjwgaJpZM4NJwYI> > . > -- GitHub Notification of comment by Martin-Pitt Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1301#issuecomment-310357575 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 22 June 2017 11:51:11 UTC