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: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 08:15:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDD24=Q8V3+y4_VF-G3AhKXczHKdrZBoueOSyMTY4+cqBg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
Cc: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2014, at 6:48 pm, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com> wrote:
>> As I've already noted in this thread, I made a mistake here. Please don't
>> hold that against me, these transform things are tricky :)
>
> On a happier note, this is evidence to support both our arguments!
>
> A. Creating a simplification for an inherently complex thing increases the
> risk of confusion and misunderstanding.

Note that the confusion wasn't about the simplification, but about the
*complicated* part - translating the intent back into a
<transform-list>.  Shane's description clearly pointed at "rotated
rectangle" as the result he thought he was going to get.  That's not
really the kind of evidence you want. ^_^

> Drive-by comment: there isn't a good fallback behaviour for these suggested
> new properties :(

What do you mean?

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 17 July 2014 15:16:04 UTC

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