W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > April to June 2011

RE: Comments on rotationAngle

From: <Cathy.Chan@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 19:31:01 +0000
To: <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>, <public-webevents@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D66EA3180FEC4248B33155A2C7E6313B014E5329@008-AM1MPN1-015.mgdnok.nokia.com>
I agree with following the CSS/SVG convention for the exact reasons that you stated.
- Cathy.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-webevents-request@w3.org [mailto:public-webevents-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of ext Matt Brubeck
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 1:11 PM
To: public-webevents@w3.org
Subject: Re: Comments on rotationAngle

On 04/01/2011 09:56 AM, Matt Brubeck wrote:
> Oops! I was a math major, and assumed that *everybody* knew that 
> positive angles are counter-clockwise:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle#Positive_and_negative_angles
>
> But I see that other W3C specs are "backward," so I will change the 
> Touch Events spec to match them. :)

To complicate matters, the InkML Candidate Recommendation defines pen rotation in counter-clockwise degrees around the origin.  So now I'm not sure.

InkML is more closely related, as it is defining the shape of a pen tip (including ellipses like the ones in the Touch Events spec). On the other hand, CSS 2D Transforms and SVG are more widespread, and are certain to be used alongside Touch Events.

I'm leaning toward the CSS/SVG convention, so authors won't need to flip angles around when translating touch areas into CSS or SVG rotations to draw them on the screen.  Any comments?
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 19:32:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 April 2011 19:32:20 GMT