W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2015

RE: [css-round-display] comments on CSS round

From: Hyojin Song <hyojin22.song@lge.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 09:29:03 +0900
To: "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Florian Rivoal'" <florian@rivoal.net>, "'Jonathan Kingston'" <jonathan@jooped.com>, "'www-style list'" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002301d09f26$a03cfef0$e0b6fcd0$@lge.com>
I definitely understand the explanation Tab mentioned, and I applied the contents in CSS Round Display spec a moment ago.

I couldn't find any information about bearing angles (0deg = up). Even though the information is internalized in several CSS and SVG spec, I think it would be specified in CSS Values and Units Module spec or any other similar spec.

Thanks for the important information, TJ, Florian, and Jonathan.


-----Original Message-----
From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 4:01 AM
To: Florian Rivoal
Cc: Hyojin Song; Jonathan Kingston; www-style list
Subject: Re: [css-round-display] comments on CSS round

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:02 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
> The convention in math is as you say, but other uses of <angle> in css 
> have positive values go clockwise, and with 0 at the top. There aren't 
> that many uses yet, but I think it would be good to be consistent.

I'll make a stronger statement - we MUST be consistent, and the pattern that CSS and SVG have already established is bearing angles (0deg = up, positive angles = clockwise).

Received on Friday, 5 June 2015 00:29:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:54 UTC