Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[css-transforms-1] Simplify transform function syntaxes #4054

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jun 26, 2019
Merged

[css-transforms-1] Simplify transform function syntaxes #4054

merged 2 commits into from Jun 26, 2019

Conversation

lahmatiy
Copy link
Contributor

@lahmatiy lahmatiy commented Jun 24, 2019

Simplify syntaxes for matrix(), translate(), scale() and skew()

@lahmatiy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Marked as non substantive for IPR from ash-nazg.

@fantasai
Copy link
Collaborator

Needs an entry in the Changes section, e.g. “Simplified grammar of transform functions. (No normative impact.)”, but otherwise it looks correct afaict.

Simplified grammar of transform functions. (No normative impact.)
@lahmatiy
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fantasai Done.

Btw I'm not sure such entries is needed in that case. At least no entries were added in my other PRs with similar fixes.

@tabatkins tabatkins merged commit 48c1c6d into w3c:master Jun 26, 2019
@tabatkins
Copy link
Member

Yeah, non-normative changes aren't always explicitly tracked. But it's still good practice to do so. ^_^

@lahmatiy
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tabatkins Thank you! Could you take a look at the relevant PR #4053? (it's just about matrix3d())

@dirkschulze
Copy link
Contributor

Are the changes to translate (and others correct? Isn’t it possible to write translate(5,) after the change now?

@dirkschulze
Copy link
Contributor

@dirkschulze
Copy link
Contributor

(I’d also appreciate to wait for the feedback of one of the spec editors before merging. The editors agreed not to merge PRs w/o feedback of other editors given the current state of the spec.)

@ewilligers
Copy link
Contributor

Isn’t it possible to write translate(5,) after the change now?

https://www.w3.org/TR/css-values-4/#component-types

Commas specified in the grammar are implicitly omissible in some circumstances, when used to separate optional terms in the grammar. Within a top-level list in a property or other CSS value, or a function’s argument list, a comma specified in the grammar must be omitted if:

all items following the comma have been omitted

example( first? , second? , third? )

Given this grammar, ... and example(first,) are invalid.

If commas were not implicitly omittable, the grammar would have to be much more complicated to properly express the ways that the arguments can be omitted, greatly obscuring the simplicity of the feature.

@tabatkins
Copy link
Member

As this was a non-substantial grammar fix, and I'm one of the editors of the spec defining said grammar, I figured it was fine to do a merge. I wouldn't merge anything subject-matter-related without one of y'all editors approving. ^_^

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants