Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-shapes-2] Minor comments on shape() (#5841)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-shapes-2] Minor comments on shape()`, and agreed to the following:

* ``RESOLVED: Accept Noam's PR (switch to `using`, allow reordering grammar)``

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: A few years ago there were some comments about shape() syntax, wanted to reoslve them<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: One is we use keyword `via` to describe intermediate points in beziers<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: Proposal is `using` instead, which amkes sense - you dont' go via the points, you just use them to create the curve<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: Other was to allow reordering the arguments, since they're distinguished by keyword<br>
&lt;smfr> q+<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: Third is to also allow &lt;position> rather than just &lt;coord-pair><br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: Currently we use `by` and `to` - `by` is relative segment, `to` is absolute. So idea is if you use `to` you can use &lt;position>, like `to top left`<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: These all make sense to me<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: There's also an animation question, I think we can defer that<br>
&lt;astearns> ack smfr<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> smfr: I agree with all of these<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> smfr: ONe thing, if you say `to` or `by` the end and control points are either all relative or all absolute<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> smfr: It makes sense to me to be able to specify control points relative to the end point<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> smfr: That would complicate the syntax, and needs something for quadratics<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> smfr: But in general it makes sense to allow moving beziers and leave control points alone becuase they're relative to the endpoints<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: I think we can address that in a separate issue<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> smfr: Right, just want to make sure we're not stopping my thing from working in the future<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: Yeah, it wont'<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: I suggest we move the &lt;position> issue to the new issue about smfr's issue<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: And for now just resolve on what's in the PR - reordering grammar, and using instead of via<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: I think we try to use prepositions, and this is a verb, so I'm not super into `using`<br>
&lt;fantasai> I don't particularly love 'using', we usually use prepositions not verbs<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> smfr: Nobody ships this yet, we can change things. It might change with the relative-control-points thing.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: I'm fine with the PR for now.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Accept Noam's PR (switch to `using`, allow reordering grammar)<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5841#issuecomment-2260966191 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 31 July 2024 16:59:28 UTC