- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:53:19 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
On 12/17/2013 06:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:21 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >>> On 12/17/2013 03:32 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>>> However, as established by FF, we can at least convert values on >>>> opposite sides of the same axis into each other, if we establish that >>>> <percentage> can be preserved as a top-level type in a calc() in some >>>> cases, which we should do. (I'm fiddling with V&U right now to allow >>>> it. It's tricky to spec.) >>> >>> I'm confused as to why you think V&U needs changes. >> >> Because right now calc() specifies that a <percentage> resolves into a >> <length> (or whatever), but for <position> to work right, we need to >> preserve its percentage-ness. > > Never mind, turns out we'd already added a paragraph that specifies > this. I just added a clarifying example to make sure it stands out, > using background-position directly. > > We just need to adjust how <position> is transitioned, and can > probably go do that in the Transitions spec. I've updated the spec's Computed Value line to be | A list, each item consisting of: a pair of offsets (horizontal | and vertical) from the top left origin each given as a | combination of an absolute length and a percentage. I think in combination with dbaron's text for the Animatable line, this should be sufficient. (Though dbaron might have some suggestions for wording improvement...) ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 18 December 2013 23:53:50 UTC