- From: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 10:00:20 +0100
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Tab Atkins Jr.: > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Christoph Päper >> >> I think if there’s a reason to include one kind of rounding there’s enough reason to include the rest, too. > > a function that only rounds to the nearest integer multiple of the modulus is rather new, Yes, but most languages don’t have values to round that are typed as strongly as the ones in CSS and hence don’t round to arbitrary multiples. For what it’s worth, I think the proposed distinction for negative values is more useful. > even/odd rounding isn't usually present by default (and, I believe, exists mainly to reduce rounding > bias when rounding lots of numbers that will be combined together, such as for finance), Yes, that’s why I think it’s beneficial for CSS, too. Designers hate it when scroll bars appear due to rounding effects. > and the distinction between toward/away from zero and toward positive/negative infinity isn't usually made. True, but like I said, usually floor and ceil are special cases of rounding down and up respectively. Since we can’t use their common behavior in CSS it could make sense to select a different one. I merely suggested two.
Received on Sunday, 29 January 2012 09:00:43 UTC