- From: Guillaume via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 18:57:19 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
My guess is that the author preferred `media-progress(<media-feature> ...)` and `container-progress(<size-feature> ...)` because it better translates the expected function arguments than `media-progress(<mf-name> ...)` and `container-progress(<mf-name> ...)`. The parens in `<media-feature>` should probably be hoisted into `<media-in-parens>` (#10131). There is also a plan to rewrite the syntax with a generic [`<boolean>`](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-values-4/#bools) (#10457). Similarly, I suggested rewriting `<mf-name>` to `<condition-name>` (#10790). Obviously, the spec says to restrict `<mf-name>` to feature whose `Type` is `range` in their definition table. -- GitHub Notification of comment by cdoublev Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10966#issuecomment-2379880220 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 27 September 2024 18:57:20 UTC