I was in the discussion and also approve. Voting. And I'd suggest frames(1) be a 50% value. Like frames(1) with blue and red would be a purple value. On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:54 PM Tab Atkins Jr. <[email protected]> wrote:
> nexii, in the WAAPI Slack, suggested frames(). I liked it when I heard it, > and after thinking about it overnight, I like it even more. > > frames(N) translates directly - it means "split this animation into N > frames". The "frame" terminology is common enough that the metaphor should > be readily understood. The spelling is simple. It automatically suggests > that both the starting and ending values show up (they have to be in one of > the "frames", after all). It's a noun that is easy to talk about > non-technically. > > (Obviously N must be 2 or greater. frames(1) would be invalid, same as > steps(0). We *could* give frames(1) a meaning, but we'd have to decide > whether it has step-start or step-end behavior, and that's better done by > the step-start/end keywords already.) > > So I think I'm throwing all of my votes behind frames() as the name for > this, and then we can mostly forget about steps(). > > ~TJ >
