W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2014

Re: [css-transforms] Making 'transform' match author expectations better with specialized 'rotate'/etc shorthands

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 15:48:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCh4+-m-+GpC+6tVka98COeS6N92Dm268we-zzBErfXxA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Lea Verou <lea@verou.me>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> If we accept Dirk’s #3 above, then doing #1 and #2 (as opposed to solely a predefined order) would not be hard. I don’t know enough to know for sure if it would actually be useful. I know that for rotate vs translate, it makes a huge difference which you do first. Though it seems (I have not double-checked the math) that you could always achieve the other effect by rotating the translation vector. So for the simple transform property subset, you probably don’t need control over the order.

You can, but then you have to adjust your rotation amount as well.
It's not really worth it; I like the idea of a transform-order
property to help control this when necessary (with the same behavior
as paint-order in SVG, where omitted keywords fill in at the end in
their normal order).

As I said in my response to Dirk, though, the translate-then-rotate
order does support what I suspect will be the most common case, where
you're using translates for layout and then rotating the object
independently.

~TJ
Received on Sunday, 13 July 2014 22:49:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:23 UTC