W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > October to December 2010

2D Transforms Update - 14 Oct 2010

From: Anthony Grasso <Anthony.Grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 06:01:10 +0000
To: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
CC: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>, "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <923A4276C1903646BE5299CA8462B0A005A944@EXM02-WVP.cisra.canon.com.au>
Hi FX-TF,

>From the feedback I received on the previous update. I've made another update to the CSS/SVG 2D Transforms specification [1].

Significant changes are:
- [ED_1] Added wording to limit the first paragraph in the Content Flow section to CSS only. Erik do you think this is ok? Do you have any other suggested wording?

- [ED_1] Changed occurrences of "For CSS..." to "For elements in the CSS box model...".

- [ACTION-17, ACTION-10] Changed initial value of 'transform-origin' to "auto". Defined auto for CSS and SVG (I think both actions can be closed).

- [DOH] Added wording to define how 'transform-origin'is applied to objects with no bounding box

- [SMFR_1, CL_1] Changed the link to unmatrix.c at http://tog.acm.org/GraphicsGems/gemsii/unmatrix.c. Added informal reference.

- [SMFR_1] Added value of "none" to transform functions. Changed initial value of transform from "identity" to "none".

- [DOH_1] Added wording to address backwards incompatibilities (rotate, origin on which transform is applied). Dr. Hoffmann to review (if he has time).

- [SMFR_1] Removed content in "recomposing the matrix" section and replaced with content from current CSS working draft. As it references 3D transform functions that are not available in this draft.


One thing I think that is fixed now is:
- [DOH_1] Address if 'transform-origin' property has any influence on old SVG transform attribute. If I can get a response specifically on this point from Dr. Hoffmann that would be great. Any suggested wording for this would also be a big help.


On my TODO list (still) is:
- IDL. We need to discuss the interface at the next telcon. CSS defines CSSMatrix and SVG defines SVGMatrix. Should they be merged into... Matrix? This may have backwards compatibility problems then. Could CSSMatrix and SVGMatrix be aliases to the same thing?

- Fix syntax in SVG examples to match actual output result

- [DOH_1] Address if the properties are independent of transform attribute used in SVG (1.1, 1.2)

- [DOH_1] Address if the transform properties are available as presentation attributes

- [DOH_1] Address how to determine the difference between original SVG attribute and new presentation attribute (example)

- [SMFR_1] Add "How to read" section to say whether this, or the CSS 2D transforms spec is the canonical reference for CSS Transforms. The role of the two specs is not really clear.

As Patrick suggested we should really start sorting some of these things out.

Once again any feedback on the latest update would be great.

Cheers,

Anthony

---
[1] http://dev.w3.org/Graphics-FX/modules/2D-transforms/spec/2DTransforms.html
---
[ACTION_10] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/track/actions/10
[ACTION_17] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/track/actions/17
[CL_1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2010OctDec/0012.html
[DOH_1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2010OctDec/0001.html
[ED_1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2010OctDec/0009.html
[SMFR_1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2010OctDec/0010.html
---
The information contained in this email message and any attachments may be confidential and may also be the subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately advise the sender by return email and delete the information from your system.
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2010 06:01:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 14 October 2010 06:01:46 GMT