Re: 2D Transforms Update

2010/10/1 Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <>:
> c) Does an animated transformation (or animation of the content of
> a property transformed element) have any influence on the
> transform-origin 50% 50% - could be very funny and frustrating for
> authors to get wild moves of the initial value due to changes of the
> bounding box ;o)
> What happens, if the element (sometimes) has not boundingBox,
> for example a rotating line or another object, scaled one dimension
> to zero?
> To say that the intial value becomes 0 is not necessarily useful for
> one dimensional objects, for them there is a need now to define
> a boundingBox for transform-origin's initial value.

A line has a bounding box, even if one dimension of the box is 0, and
percentages are well defined and predictable even when the dimension
they're referring to is 0.

> d) Some transformation functions (section 'Transformation Functions')
> have values like <angle> or <translation-value>.
> Does it imply additional unit identifiers in SVG or in CSS?
> For example for CSS angle is currently (CSS2.0 or CSS3 draft,
> not available at all in the referenced CSS2.1) only available
> for aural style sheets and requires a unit - I assume that the transform
> property will be applicable not just for aural style sheets in the future
> and hopefully the angles will not be normalised if applied to rotations,
> as currently required in CSS.

In CSS3 the <angle> value is defined by CSS3 Values & Units.  It
definitely isn't just an aural-specific unit.

The definition of <angle> will indeed be changed to not automatically
normalize, based on previous discussion in the CSS group.


Received on Friday, 1 October 2010 14:50:57 UTC