- From: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:22:41 -0800
- To: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 05/02/2012, at 10:11 AM, Dean Jackson wrote: > I don't really want to argue this any more. I (hope I) understand your point and I agree that it is valid. I'm still on the side of space-separation but I'm ok if the WG goes the other way. And immediately after saying that, I thought of something :) Adding commas into transforms will make it very hard if any future property accepts a list of transforms. This relates to my point that transform *looks* like a list but is really just an alternate method for describing a *single* value. For example, one could imagine a background-transform property that applies a transform to background values. We'd have to add more syntax to support this. (Note: I kind-of think background transform is a nice idea! :) > But if so, then it needs to remain consistent with SVG, so I would definitely want to see the SVG Recommendation updated at the same time (of course that will be bad because it will break all SVG content that uses transforms). I think this is an important factor. We're already slightly inconsistent with SVG - I wouldn't want to make it worse. Dean > > This reminds me that public-fx is probably the place at which this discussion should take place. The transforms specification is now a jointly owned work between SVG and CSS. > > Dean > >
Received on Sunday, 5 February 2012 18:23:23 UTC