- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 05:56:48 -0700
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote: > Yes, this does feel much cleaner and simpler. I disagree, actually. I think that both "reverse" and "alternate" are very clear names. "alternate-reverse" isn't ideal, but it's not bad either, and I don't know how to say it more cleanly. > There already is content using > animation-direction though. And here we get back in part of the prefix controversy > - 'Prefixes are there to enable this kind of change!'/'We shouldn't go arbitrarily > change what people are already using without a good reason!' - and as this is one > of the specs the group wants to unprefix yesterday this co-editor is torn. We should > talk about this at the f2f next week. Yes, Animations is no longer in the "we can make aesthetic changes" stage. It left that a long time ago, we just didn't finish the spec before that happened, like we're supposed to. ~TJ
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2012 12:57:37 UTC