- From: Jake Archibald via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 07:43:00 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> (And note that `steps()` cannot be reproduced with this function anyway - steps produces discontinuous easings while this is always C0-continuous, at least.) Huh, I thought you could? For example, `steps(3, jump-end)` would be `function-name(0 0% 33.3%, .333 33.3% 66.6%, .666 66.6% 100%, 1 100% 100%)` > Strongly opposed to `ease()`, as this isn't _remotely_ related to the `ease-*` keywords They're pretty related, in that they all return easing functions. I think the main problem with `ease` is that it's too different to the keyword. > Similarly opposed to `easing()`; it also doesn't match the conjugation of the other values. I guess you're not convinced by future extensions that would make it non-linear, eg `easing(0, ease-out to 0.5, ease-in to 1)`? > `linear()` is definitely the best option Fair enough. I guess we'd come up with a different method name if we want to allow non-linear parts. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jakearchibald Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7419#issuecomment-1168356230 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2022 07:43:02 UTC