- From: Sebastian Zartner via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2023 22:39:43 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> I would not make changes to css-grid-1 or css-grid-2, since they're in CR already; and if we're introducing a generic definition, it should go into css-values-5, because it's new and hasn't quite stabilized yet. Ok, I reverted the changes to css-grid-1 and css-grid-2 and moved the definition to css-values-5. > I'm also unsure about `<fraction>` vs `<flex>`; we've been using `<flex>` for awhile now because it helps tie the idea to the way flexbox works (which was the goal)... it's short for “flex fraction” in that spec. But that's just bikeshedding. :) While Flexbox refers to different types of "flex fractions", `<flex>` is _not_ part of Flexbox. It is part of Grid, which calls it "flex fractions". The [confusion with Flexbox](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/7029#issuecomment-1104451018) is a great indicator that it should be renamed (which was [initially suggested](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/7029#issuecomment-1104458371) by @LeaVerou). Also, there might be other use cases in which the relation to flexible lengths could be hindering. E.g. it could be used to indicate fractions of angles, times or frequencies at some point. Sebastian -- GitHub Notification of comment by SebastianZ Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/9516#issuecomment-1817667245 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Saturday, 18 November 2023 22:39:44 UTC