- From: Guillaume via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 12:52:01 +0000
- To: public-fxtf-archive@w3.org
> The question here is, can and should both definitions be merged into one?
In my opinion, they can and should be merged, with specific rules written in prose, because it prevents [automatic parsing of value definition](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2921).
`<path()>` would reference the definition of CSS Shapes from Motion and Motion would define that `<'fill-rule'>` is invalid.
`<size>` would be merged to
- `closest-side | closest-corner | farthest-side | farthest-corner | sides | <length-percentage>`
- or `closest-side | closest-corner | farthest-side | farthest-corner | sides | <length> | <length-percentage>{2}`
- or `closest-side | closest-corner | farthest-side | farthest-corner | sides | <length [0,∞]> | <length-percentage [0,∞]>{2}`
Motion would define that `<length-percentage>` is invalid, and CSS Shapes would define that `<length [0,∞]>` only applies when `<basic-shape>` is `circle` and `<length-percentage [0,∞]>{2}` only applies when `<basic-shape>` is `ellipse`.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by cdoublev
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/411#issuecomment-1156433545 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2022 12:52:02 UTC