W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2011

Re: [css3-transform] definition of skewing

From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 22:18:54 -0800
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-id: <C667AFAC-2B90-4566-AF1C-18BC39AE86C9@me.com>
To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@adobe.com>
On Jan 12, 2011, at 9:58 pm, Rik Cabanier wrote:

> I agree that if you want to follow the SVG spec, skew is well defined.
> Why would you object to have 2 parameters for rotate? It seems like a useful effect to have and not that different from the existing rotate.

We're trying to keep CSS and SVG transforms as similar as possible; in fact, via the FX Task Force, we'd like to end up with a single spec for both eventually.

> Rotate(45, 45) would result in the same effect as rotate(45)

I don't see how that works at all. Rotation is defined as being around a point. How can you have different angles for the two axes?

>  
> The spec still says that skew(x, y) is still valid so maybe it should be updated.

It's been removed from the editor's draft:
<http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-2d-transforms/>

Simon
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 06:19:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:36 GMT