W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > May 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] reconsider name of frames() timing function

From: Rachel Nabors via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 08 May 2017 01:05:50 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-299749586-1494205549-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
I like adding onto the `steps()` syntax, personally. Use what is already there.

(Although, `steps()` is still a horrible name for the timing function! Explaining it to students always elicits confusion. `jumps()` may have made more sense, but alas. The dye is cast!)

In that light, "even" might not make sense to folks who may not even fully understand `start` and `end`.

GitHub Notification of comment by rachelnabors
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1301#issuecomment-299749586 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 8 May 2017 01:05:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:12 UTC