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

Re: [css3-transform] definition of skewing

From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:07:01 -0800
Cc: Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-id: <5FD09172-684F-4953-9233-E520F52DF416@me.com>
To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@adobe.com>
No. The 3D transforms spec doesn't explain this very well yet (and WebKit's implementation doesn't yet do what I want), but the idea is that 3D transforms by default are just drawing effects, like 2D. You only start to run into interpenetration issues if you use transform-style: preserve-3d.

Simon

On Jan 18, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:

> Very cool!
> However, wonít this fall apart when there are other elements on the page and in the same location?
>  
> Rik
>  
> From: Simon Fraser [mailto:smfr@me.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 4:06 PM
> To: Rik Cabanier
> Cc: Chris Marrin; www-style@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [css3-transform] definition of skewing
>  
> On Jan 17, 2011, at 5:13 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> 
> 
> Iíve attached an example.
> It simply rotates a symbol 360 degrees around one of the axis.
>  
> Let me know if the attachment doesnít make it and Iíll post it online.
>  
>  
> Here's the CSS 3D transforms equivalent:
> <http://smfr.org/misc/spinny.html>
>  
> View this in Safari 5 on Mac or Windows for actual 3D. In Chrome, it will fall back to flattened-3D, which, ironically, looks closer to your sample.
>  
> Using actual 3D transforms to express a flip like this also looks better: it doesn't suffer the Necker cube effect.
>  
> Note that I didn't have to muck with z-order or add any extra elements.
>  
> Simon
>  
Received on Wednesday, 19 January 2011 02:07:55 GMT

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