Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-easing-1] Some ideas for linear() easing (#6533)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-easing] Some ideas for linear() easing`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Accept this as L2 Editor’s Draft.`
* `RESOLVED: Add Jake Archibald as editor/co-editor of that Editor’s Draft.`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;fantasai> Topic: [css-easing] Some ideas for linear() easing<br>
&lt;fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/6533#issuecomment-1023455165<br>
&lt;emeyer> Github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/6533#issuecomment-1023455165<br>
&lt;faceless> present-<br>
&lt;emeyer> JakeA: (presents slides)<br>
&lt;emeyer> …Idea is why not let people define a bunch of points in the easing space and we’ll interpolate between them?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> Big +1<br>
&lt;emeyer> …`linear-spline()` would permit more complex easing patterns<br>
&lt;argyle> +1<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> Probably still want to extend cubic-bezier() later, yeah, but this is perfectly acceptable and reasonable on its own<br>
&lt;flackr> +1<br>
&lt;emeyer> …This would leave the door open to a nicer system later on, and in the meantime we can allow elastic easing (including bounce easing)<br>
&lt;chris> q+<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack chris<br>
&lt;emeyer> chris: Overall I think this is a good thing.  It’s a nice balance between complexity and usability.  I’d like to see this move forward.  Is there a volunteer to edit this level 2 easing spec?  JAKE?<br>
&lt;emeyer> JakeA: What would that mean?<br>
&lt;emeyer> chris: It means handling feedback and pushing things forward to get to implementation.<br>
&lt;emeyer> JakeA: Yeah, I’ll give it a go.<br>
&lt;emeyer> Rossen: Great, thanks for being a good sport.<br>
&lt;smfr> q+<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack fantasai<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> More than happy to help Jake out fwiw<br>
&lt;emeyer> fantasai: I think we need two resolutions.  One to create easing-2 and the other to incorporate this proposal.  I’d also like to suggest FPWD as soon as it’s in.<br>
&lt;smfr> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/280<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack smfr<br>
&lt;argyle> been in safari for ages too right?!<br>
&lt;emeyer> smfr: There is a proposal for spring timing functions.  I do think we should continue with the current suggestion.<br>
&lt;emeyer> Rossen: Sounds like it will be great to start this as ED, put the work in, move it to L2.  We can go to FPWD as soon as there’s enough support.  We’ll see if Dino’s spring function effort can go in as well.<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q?<br>
&lt;emeyer> RESOLVED: Accept this as L2 Editor’s Draft.<br>
&lt;JakeA> Reporting for duty!<br>
&lt;emeyer> RESOLVED: Add Jake Archibald as editor/co-editor of that Editor’s Draft.<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/6533#issuecomment-1041926154 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2022 17:45:27 UTC