- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2024 00:09:22 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> sibling-count() and sibling-index() are [already defined to return <integer>](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-values-5/#tree-counting). Lol indeed, so bad example on my part. > I'm not sure about this. I think it's reasonable to require that these functions be explicitly rounded -- it's reasonably likely that the author might want a different rounding behavior, and they can make that explicit with round(). I don't understand this argument. If the user *does* want a different rounding behavior, sure, they're allowed to use `round()` to achieve that. Why does that mean such functions should be invalid (grammar mismatch) when they don't explicitly round? Why does this argument not apply to the existing behavior that auto-rounds math functions? -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11040#issuecomment-2471975906 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2024 00:09:23 UTC