- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 16:26:18 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-values] Math Constant phi for Golden Ratio`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: Reject for now and if data shows up from http archive that it is fairly common we re-open and put it in` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <dael> Topic: [css-values] Math Constant phi for Golden Ratio<br> <tantek> whether or not WebKit implements it<br> <dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4702#issuecomment-660684501<br> <dael> TabAtkins: I expect this to be short. Christoph has been asking for phi to list of constants<br> <dael> TabAtkins: I'm against. phi is largely numerology. In cases where it's used, 1.6 is very close to phi. There's virtually no instance where you need precise. Exact spirals maybe but I haven't seen that in CSS<br> <hober> q+<br> <dael> TabAtkins: I suggest resolve not to add phi. Unofficially I doubt any other constant will rise to importance of add to CSS<br> <astearns> ack hober<br> <dael> hober: Prefice by saying I'm not dying on this hill. Fine to not add. There is a reasonable argument that CSS is used to create compelling visual designs. Having htis built in would allow people to do that.<br> <dael> hober: Agree with TabAtkins phi isn't interesting mathematically. But CSS isn't matLab. We're trying to provide practical tools for designers. THere's a long tradition of golden ratio in design<br> <gsnedders_web> q?<br> <gsnedders_web> q+<br> <dael> TabAtkins: INteresting that's the exact reason I think we shouldn't. Math reason is good, but design with golden ratio in practice you can use 1.6. Anything that specifically wants an exact value where I've seen examples they're happy to round to whole pixels so they're looking for something around there. THey're not looking for mathematical properties, they don't factor in<br> <dael> TabAtkins: It's unlike pi where inprecise shows up when you're doing circular.<br> <leaverou> q+<br> <astearns> ack gsnedders_web<br> <jensimmons> q+<br> <dael> gsnedders_web: I agree with TabAtkins that precise doesn't matter. BUt we have enough people that want to use phi where sake of clarifying what people want to do the constant is useful<br> <astearns> ack leaverou<br> <dael> leaverou: There have been studies on this and people gravitate to different ratios than phi. It's been experimentally proven. If I remember people gravitate to 1.4 or 1.7.<br> <dael> leaverou: Also unlike pi and e phi can be computed relatively easily. pi for example we can't do that easily. phi anyone can define their own variable and compute it to use in stylesheet<br> <dael> leaverou: Also, I've never seen a phi variable in a stylesheet. If needed wouldn't we see in wild? I haven't seen in Sass or CS variables<br> <astearns> ack jensimmons<br> <dael> TabAtkins: Right, where I have seen pi<br> <dael> jensimmons: I agree with TabAtkins that it's okay if people use 1.6 and don't need precise. I agree with leaverou that this fetishization of golden ratio is rediculous. But I think it's interesting to add. It is humans writing this. It's not that it's not possible to calculate. BUt it's giving people a tool and saying here it is. If it's hard to impl whatever. BUt it's simple. It's a human question, is there a nudge to say to humans you should think abo[CUT]<br> <dael> jensimmons: I have not seen people put golden ratio specifically. But I have seen complicated sass frameworks deeply based on ratios. This is age of floats. But there is interest in this kind of space<br> <dael> TabAtkins: If I recall Bolton work was exponential work. Asending series, not just golden<br> <dael> jensimmons: Both. Golden and a bunch of others<br> <astearns> s/Bolton/Boulton/<br> <dael> TabAtkins: You brought up it's not difficult to impl. You're completely right. None of the constants are hard to add. Impl effort is more or less nill. Because of that I want to be more principled to make sure there is a need i nthe design community.<br> <dael> TabAtkins: I don't think we'll get much value from many constants so we want to have a bar<br> <dael> plinss: Maybe similar to how we handle additional names colors<br> <dael> plinss: It's morally eq to adding a named color. We're giving names to colors.<br> <plinss> s/names to colors/names to numbers/<br> <dael> TabAtkins: Yeah, they're not hard to put together. Yeah. We have extra hard line against named color because that's horrible. Named constants isn't as bad, but I agree it's pretty similar<br> <dael> plinss: There are useful named colors, black white red. But we don't want to add every named color<br> <dael> jensimmons: Agree we shouldn't go nuts with this. but I think reason behind this is golden ratio is taught in art schools. I could see a lot of discssion on this once it ships. I don't feel that way about any other mathematical number<br> <gregwhitworth> q+<br> <dael> astearns: I agree us doing it could push more use of phi. I'm not sure that's our place. I think we should be responding to more use. More interest in having it if people noticed it showing up in a lot of sass variables or custom properties.<br> <dael> astearns: Wary of let's put it out there and let people use it.<br> <astearns> ack gregwhitworth<br> <dael> gregwhitworth: Doing a quick scan ir doesn't look like it's in JS, phi. I think this is a great candidate for what leaverou brought up of finding stuff up based on data. We should find out if there's common math eq in calcs.<br> <dael> gregwhitworth: If it's not in JS I question strong case of adding it<br> <dael> TabAtkins: I don't take is it in JS too strongly. We do more than JS does with math. It's used in design less computing so not surprising. THe database approach is right. leaverou casual investigation hasn't shown it, but we could look in http archive. If you see 1.618 show up a bunch it indicates people are using golden ratio<br> <dael> TabAtkins: A lot of cases it would shwo it it will have fairly simple patterns<br> <dael> TabAtkins: Prop: reject for now and leaverou would you take this on for http archive data?<br> <dael> leaverou: Sure. I was planning on popular variables already<br> <dael> TabAtkins: Prop: Reject for now and if data shows up from http archive that it is fairly common we re-open and put it in.<br> <dael> astearns: Objections?<br> <dael> RESOLVED: Reject for now and if data shows up from http archive that it is fairly common we re-open and put it in<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4702#issuecomment-662552815 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2020 16:26:21 UTC