W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2013

Re: Behavior of transform: rotate on <body> element.

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 10:14:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDuhB7XpoxBoF0cmG33eWig8ou81kVDU=gJv0-0YkJG1A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Cc: Vivek Galatage <vivekg@chromium.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 19:13:27 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Vivek Galatage <vivekg@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have come across the below situation in which we use "transform:
>>> rotate(180deg);" on the "<body>" element. http://jsbin.com/EQabAnE/2
>>>
>>> The first half of the image shows the behavior of Chrome, Safari and IE
>>> with respect to the transformation. The other half depicts the behavior of
>>> FF and Opera(12) with the same transformation.
>>
>>
>> This has nothing to do with Transforms; rather, it's a quirks mode
>> behavior.  In quirks mode, IE and webkit/blink make the body element
>> fill the viewport by default.  FF and old Opera apparently don't.
>
> http://quirks.spec.whatwg.org/ sides with Gecko and Presto.

I should really look at specs before assuming I correctly remember
what they specify.  ^_^

>> I
>> don't think this quirk has been documented, and it's unclear that it's
>> needed, since they act differently.
>
> So you mean that lack of interop of something means we don't need to spec
> it?

Nah, I mean that lack of interop means we may be able to drop the
quirk from engines.

~TJ
Received on Monday, 2 December 2013 18:15:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:17 UTC