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

Re: [css3-2d-transforms] "longhand" for the transform stack

From: Aaron Gustafson <aaron@easy-designs.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:45:32 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTin+JAwVLbk9i-4gOMQZuXNoChp=QRbPRiEyY=Ci@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style@w3.org
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 6:38 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>wrote:

> On 03/24/2011 03:14 PM, Aaron Gustafson wrote:
>> That certainly makes sense and is something I hadn't considered, but I do
>> still think we should look for some balance. On one
>> hand there's the incredible power inherent in specifically ordering your
>> transformations and on the other hand there's a
>> desire to easily (and with limited repetition) being able to successfully
>> manage ever more complex stacks of transformations.
> Going back to your original problem statement:
>  The issue(s): Based on the current model, it is difficult for authors to
>> manage compound transforms for transitions as well as in the context of
>> the cascade. This issue is exacerbated when it comes to dynamic
>> manipulation
>> (via script) because most browsers supporting transforms currently only
>> expose the current transform state as a matrix, which is not
>> human-readable.
> I don't have any solutions for managing the cascade,
> but for dynamic manipulation, it would probably make
> the most sense to introduce better APIs for manipulating
> the value of the 'transform' property.

+1. Absolutely! Matrix makes sense if you think like that, but if not,
matrices are incredibly confusing.

> As for the cascade, we have similar problems with multiple
> shadows and backgrounds. Probably they should all be solved
> in the same way.




Aaron Gustafson
Easy Designs, LLC
Received on Thursday, 24 March 2011 22:46:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:44 UTC