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.

--Myles
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