RE: [css3-2d-transforms] Should a transformed element reflow its content ?

I don’t see how not reflowing the transformed content to reflect the scrollbars it causes prevents you from seeing the transformed content.

I’m not arguing against transformed causing overflow. I’m arguing against the latter causing the transformed content to reflow before being transformed. If I’m scaling content that has no overflow, I expect the transformed version to look like a scaled up version of itself, just like it does when overflow is visible.

Only in the overflow:scroll case does it make sense for the transform to reflect the presence of scrollbars, imo.

From: rocallahan@gmail.com [mailto:rocallahan@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robert O'Callahan
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:37 AM
To: Sylvain Galineau
Cc: Simon Fraser; Øyvind Stenhaug; www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [css3-2d-transforms] Should a transformed element reflow its content ?

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com<mailto:sylvaing@microsoft.com>> wrote:
Well, I find this behavior to be really weird. The content did *not* cause any overflow, the transform did. So this visual effect that supposedly happens post-layout turns out to change the rendering of the object being transformed to reflect the presence of scrollbars that wouldn’t be there if it wasn’t for the transform. It doesn’t seem that great perf-wise either.

Maybe so, although I think you can optimize pretty well for the case where there no visible scrollbars could be affected.

Maybe the "post-layout" aspect was oversold (by who?), but I do think this behaviour is best for users and authors. If you want to be able to scroll to see overflowing content, presumably you want to be able to see transformed content too.

Rob
--
"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]