- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 12:17:33 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Lea Verou <lea@verou.me>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Dec 3, 2013, at 7:55 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Lea Verou <lea@verou.me> wrote: >> On Dec 3, 2013, at 00:39, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Yeah, I've thought about this before. I'm in favor of it. >> >> Great! Anyone else? >> >> Btw, I've noticed many authors don't know what interpolation means, even native English speakers, so perhaps we need a different name than interpolate(). I've thought of combine() but it doesn't make sense for e.g. lengths. Definitely not cross-fade() though, that's confusing even for images (for which it was designed). > > More synonyms for combine() could be blend() or mix(). What about cross-fade()? Oh wait... > > Ultimately, we're stuck with either using a name that's not perfect > for all types, or using a name for the generic operation that many > people won't understand. > > ~TJ >
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 20:17:59 UTC