- From: Guillaume via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2022 16:08:25 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
`<time [0s, ∞]>` should/can be `<time [0, ∞]>`, I agree, cf. [#7400 (comment)](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7400#issuecomment-1163491519). > So long as it's clear, I think the range limitation is fine without units, yeah. 0 and infinity are always clear; numbers/integers are correct anyway, and percentage has a single possible unit so non-zero values are clear too. The initial argument for `0s` was that it is not a valid `<time>` but that is not necessary and `∞` and `∞s` are not valid `<time>` either. It would be nice to have these clarifications in CSS Value. `<ratio>` expands to `<number [0,∞]> [/ <number [0,∞]>]?` but it may be noted as `<ratio [0,∞]>` in `<mf-value>` and `aspect-ratio` property, so as not to restrict future values which must accept negative ratios, similarly as `<length-percentage [0,∞]>`, noting that `<length-percentage [1px,∞]>` would be problematic when providing a percentage as input and shows some limitations of this range notation. -- GitHub Notification of comment by cdoublev Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7572#issuecomment-1206619307 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 5 August 2022 16:08:27 UTC