- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 15:36:12 +1100
- To: Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>, public-fx@w3.org
On 23/02/2012 3:25 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > (BCC'd www-style, replies should go to public-fx) > > Bug: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15432 > > What should something like "transform-origin: left bottom 10px" do? > According to the old 2D Transforms spec and the current merged spec, > it places the origin at the left edge of the element's border box, > 10px from the bottom, with z = 0. According to the old 3D transforms > spec, it places the origin at the bottom left of the element's border > box, with z = 10px. IE10 Developer Preview, Firefox 13.0a1, and > Chrome 18 dev all follow the old 3D spec. Opera Next 12.00 alpha > (which does not implement 3D transforms) appears to follow neither > spec, and treats it like "left top" as far as I can see, which I admit > that I don't understand at all. A few questions since we do not have depth: <value>; (for z-dimension) and we do not have display devices that project cubes. 1. How it is possible to have transform-origin for a z-axis when the element in question is 2 dimensional (only x and y axis) box. 2. The bug report has a test with rotate(). This is rotateZ() in 3D virtual space. Why would you not use translateZ(). 3. The bug report shows that Dean has proposed transform-origin-z. How would transform-origin-z and translateZ() behave differently. (Aside, I do believe background-position was poorly designed) -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/
Received on Saturday, 25 February 2012 04:36:42 UTC