- From: Vincent Hardy <vhardy@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 11:09:47 -0800
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 19:10:28 UTC
From: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org<mailto:dbaron@dbaron.org>> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 10:20:56 -0800 To: "public-fx@w3.org<mailto:public-fx@w3.org>" <public-fx@w3.org<mailto:public-fx@w3.org>> Subject: Re: Where should editorial resources on transforms go? On Thursday 2011-12-01 13:08 -0800, Simon Fraser wrote: On Dec 1, 2011, at 12:27 PM, L. David Baron wrote: > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-transforms/ > a spec that I thought was going to be a merger of the above two, > but looks like it has only 2-D This is Vincent's combined spec, and I think should be the ultimate, all-singing all-dancing 2D/3D/SVG transforms spec. What's going to be in this other than what's in 3-D transforms? More importantly, will that slow down getting to CR, and will it slow down entering PR? Given the number of implementations we have of what's in 2-D and 3-D transforms, I think we should prioritize getting those specs to CR and to REC rather than adding additional material. Hi Dave, The agreement for the consolidated spec is to have: - 2D - 3D - CSS & SVG transforms merged Kind regards, Vincent.
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 19:10:28 UTC