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

RE: [css3-transform] definition of skewing

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:37:04 -0800
To: Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>
CC: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8A13F0222395BD428969E5BA529EFA7477672538A6@NAMBX01.corp.adobe.com>
Hi Chris,

What if a designer doesn't want the first skew affect the second one?
I think that usually, he just wants both angles applied at the same time...

Rik

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Marrin [mailto:cmarrin@apple.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 4:07 PM
To: Rik Cabanier
Cc: Simon Fraser; www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [css3-transform] definition of skewing


On Jan 17, 2011, at 5:13 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:

...
>   Again, that's what matrix() is for. A skew(x,y) primitive would always have the issue of ordering between x and y. I think the current primitives are plenty for allowing authors to construct matrices.
> The issue is also with transitions/animations.
>  
> Also, why would skew(x, y) have an issue of ordering? The matrix would be:
> | 1        tan(x)   0 |
> | tan(y) 1          0 |
> | 0        0         1 |
>  
> It doesn't seem necessary to have a separate skewx/skewy since there is usually no need to concatenate skews.

skewX(60deg) skewY(20deg) gives you different results than skewY(20deg) skewX(60deg). Which order would skew(0deg, 20deg) use? If we leave it as skewX() and skewY() the author can choose

-----
~Chris
cmarrin@apple.com
Received on Wednesday, 19 January 2011 01:37:36 GMT

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