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

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

From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 00:38:07 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-300028913-1494290286-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
We had the "should we just reuse steps()?" discussion earlier, and decided not to do so, for precisely the reason Amelia gives - the two versions interpret the numeric argument substantially differently.  Using a brand new name reduces the confusion factor.

I'd like to stick with `frames()` here, as it invokes all the right intuitions - if you're animating a sprite sheet, it literally means frames, and even in the general animation case, instead of a smooth animation it's divided into N static frames.

While there is a little bit of semantic overlaap with `rAF()`, I don't think the two are close enough to be worried about.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1301#issuecomment-300028913 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2017 00:38:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 10:12:53 UTC