W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2016

Re: [css-snappoints] [css-scroll-snap] Summary of latest updates 1/13

From: Myles C. Maxfield <mmaxfield@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 17:08:21 -0800
Cc: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Matt Rakow <marakow@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>
Message-id: <4E043BA9-0F3C-40B3-9940-6C1DE12BF2EE@apple.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>

> On Jan 15, 2016, at 4:34 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:
>>> On 16 Jan 2016, at 10:52 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>>>> Ok.  Did you and Apple discuss any additional clarifications that
>>>> should be added to address their original concerns?
>>> Not specifically, no. But we did just check in a bunch of clarifications
>>> in response to Sebastian Zartner's email:
>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Jan/0099.html
>> We asked for 2d snap points to be deferred from this version. Is there
>> anyone actively arguing for it? I thought we agreed in Japan that the
>> use case either could be done another way or wasn't necessary (sorry,
>> foggy memory as usual).
> No, it definitely can't be done in another way, and for the use-cases
> presented, it is necessary.

This is correct, Dean's memory was foggy. Our objection was that implementing it is too difficult to understand all the behaviors that would be caused by the property.

Received on Saturday, 16 January 2016 01:08:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:59 UTC