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

The CSS Working Group just discussed `ericwilligers we'd still need to decide the default`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: <size> argument of ray() is required.`
* `RESOLVED: Name the "cast to the side you're pointing at" value "sides"`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>

```
<astearns> topic: ericwilligers we'd still need to decide the default
<TabAtkins> fantasai: That's *a* use-case yes, maybe the most common one.
<shane> Github Topic: https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/73
<TabAtkins> ChrisL: Yeah, and why not make the most common use-case be the easiest thing to do?
<TabAtkins> Florian: [gives example of putting the start-point in the corner instead, where closest-side will send all %s to 0.]
<TabAtkins> shane: I think the default of a polar-positioning feature should be a circle.
<TabAtkins> astearns: What about making size always required?
<TabAtkins> fantasai: [doesn't like requiring it]
<ericwilligers> No default would be needed for function  ray(<angle> && <size> && contain?)
<TabAtkins> TabAtkins: [heh, fantasai wants a default, but prefers a different default than anyone else]
<TabAtkins> shane: Straw poll?
<TabAtkins> fantasai: I'm against making it required, but won't oppose it. I will oppose defaulting it to closest-side.
<TabAtkins> RESOLVED: <size> argument of ray() is required.
<TabAtkins> [discussion of naming the keyword]
<Rossen> sidez
<TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Name the "cast to the side you're pointing at" value "sides"
```
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/73#issuecomment-296084456 using your GitHub account

Received on Friday, 21 April 2017 06:05:46 UTC