On 11 Apr 2016, at 19:55, fantasai wrote: > I think what you're expecting totally makes sense, but also > fixing it would mean adding additional steps to the track > sizing algorithm, which I'm a little hesitant to do right > now... > > But something that's imho definitely worth investigating, > so perhaps it would make sense to make this syntax invalid > for the moment, so that we can figure out what to do with > it in Level 2. How are you thinking of invalidating? Forbid 'fr' units from being used in the 'min' position, or ban then from minmax() expressions altogether, or something else entirely? -- Eric A. Meyer - http://meyerweb.com/Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2016 17:54:11 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:02 UTC