[fxtf-drafts] [motion] Should omitted <size> just extend to the containing block edge?

fantasai has just created a new issue for 
https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts:

== [motion] Should omitted <size> just extend to the containing block 
edge? ==
> <size>
>    Decides the position of the end point of the path. ...  If 
omitted it defaults to closest-side.

I think it's quite reasonable that someone might want to position 
along a polar ray between the initial point and the edge of the 
containing block at a non-orthogonal angle. Simplest way to allow this
 would be that if an omitted size argument were left out, the ray 
extends to the edge of the containing block at the specified angle. 
Constraining `100%` to match regardless of `<angle>`  would require a 
keyword, but I don't think this is unreasonable. In particular it'd be
 less surprising in cases where the initial position chosen as one of 
the corners (or along an edge), which is a fairly common and 
reasonable case, but would result in a (surprising) path distance of 
zero.

Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/73 using your GitHub account

Received on Saturday, 5 November 2016 03:19:17 UTC