W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: Transform specs

From: Vincent Hardy <vhardy@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:57:12 -0800
To: Cyril Concolato <Cyril.Concolato@cisra.canon.com.au>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
CC: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Message-ID: <CB4EBCA1.2FCC7%vhardy@adobe.com>
From: Cyril Concolato <Cyril.Concolato@cisra.canon.com.au<mailto:Cyril.Concolato@cisra.canon.com.au>>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:41:03 -0800
To: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com<mailto:dschulze@adobe.com>>, Adobe Systems <vhardy@adobe.com<mailto:vhardy@adobe.com>>
Cc: "public-fx@w3.org<mailto:public-fx@w3.org>" <public-fx@w3.org<mailto:public-fx@w3.org>>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com<mailto:smfr@me.com>>
Subject: RE: Transform specs

*  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 [SMFR_1<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2010OctDec/0010.html>]
Done? The mail of Vincent says he added a reference into the old specs.
[Cyril] Yes, I think the notes added to the different specs satisfy that comment.

Hi,

Thanks for taking care of this Dirk.

Yes, the notes are in the editor drafts, pointing to the new merged spec. but we need to publish these specs.

I'll ask if that is can be added to the CSS WG agenda today.

Thanks,
Vincent
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 07:57:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 February 2012 07:58:00 GMT