- From: Oriol Brufau via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 17:38:51 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@Loirooriol in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11742#issuecomment-2707892748 > And then we can say that if the options are omitted, they they default to per-element followed by an ident consisting of --, the property name, --, and the index. @tabatkins in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11742#issuecomment-2708373047 > When writing the examples, the progression from "most random" to "most shared" now had a weird curve - omitting the key got you the most randomness, adding one value to the key suddenly flipped you to the least randomness, then adding two values put you back in the middle. So yeah they look like opposites but "completely random" is desirable in a short way, and "completely shared" can be opted in with just `random(--global, 0, 1)`. So it seems more useful to make the case with omitted options be completely random. It's a matter of whether it's more confusing to have a special behavior for no options which is the opposite of what you would normally expect, vs the inverted model where a keyword implies sharing across all dimensions except (for no immediately obvious reason) across elements. -- GitHub Notification of comment by Loirooriol Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11742#issuecomment-2711354767 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 10 March 2025 17:38:52 UTC