- From: Chris Lilley via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 21:23:08 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@jen sorry but could you explain what is wrong in the spec? > RESOLVED: change high to no-limit That was done in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11698 > `<weinig>` fantasai: maybe we can resolve on standard and no-limit, and ask the rest of the wg on names > `<weinig>` ChrisL: we already are pretty resolved on standard and no-limit Not an actual resolution, but the spec does have `standard` and `no-limit` and as the minutes say, the other name is up in the air. Value: | standard \| no-limit \| constrained-high \| <dynamic-range-limit-mix()> -- | -- Initial: | no-limit Several people proposed `constrained` rather than `constrained-high` and I [said](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11698#issuecomment-2718585911) I preferred it, and @fantasai [said](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11698#issuecomment-2718739800) she did not. We have **Agenda+** so hope we can resolve on `constrained` -- GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11698#issuecomment-2836725870 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 28 April 2025 21:23:09 UTC