- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 22:32:19 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
tabatkins has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [css-shapes-1] Interpolation between rectangular shapes == As part of the object-view-box resolutions, I've added rect() and xywh() functions to `<basic-shape>`. Along with inset(), we now have three ways to specify a rectangle. Should these be mutually interpolatable? That is, should I be able to interpolate between a rect() and an inset()? You *can* express any of them in terms of the other two, even without layout information, just by using calc() and percentages. If they are, which function should they become during the interpolation, when they differ? Should we prefer one of the three, or use the starting or ending function? Precedent in this space are the transform functions, where you can interpolate between things like translateX() and translateY(), or translate() and translate3d(). These have a clear "upgrade" path to a more "complete" version of the function, tho: translate() is more complete than translateX() or translateY(); and translate3d() is more complete than any of those. There isn't a similar hierarchy between the rectangle functions to guide us in a choice, tho. Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7111 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 7 March 2022 22:32:21 UTC