- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:35:53 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The rename of `anchor-default` to `position-anchor` was predicated on the idea that the `anchor-*` prefix should be used for properties on the anchor element, not the positioned element, so `anchor-area` would be out. I'm not sure why `position-area` is particularly better than `inset-area`, tho. Both of them are words related to abspos. We chose `inset-area` because it's most directly about modifying how the `inset-*` properties behave (by modifying the containing block). In the common case, you'll use *either* `inset` *or* `inset-area`, but usually not both; it feels appropriate to me that their names match up like that when they occupy nearly identical functional spaces. `position-area` wouldn't be *inappropriate*, but I personally don't find it *better*, either. (The two big renames we've done so far - `position-anchor` and `position-try` - both had pretty strong consistency arguments for making them, either consistency with the anchor-*/position-* dichotomy, or consistency with the redesigned `@position-try` rule. I'd prefer to have at least a moderate speedbump for renames at this point in the spec's life.) -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10209#issuecomment-2057564661 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 15 April 2024 18:35:54 UTC