Re: Transforms on inline elements

2010/11/16 Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>:
> On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
>> On 11/16/10 1:09 AM, Simon Fraser wrote:
>>> For this reason, I propose that CSS Transforms be limited to block-level elements, and inline elements that are never split into multiple boxes (i.e. replaced elements, inline-block and inline-table).
>>
>> Block elements can also be split into multiple boxes: see columns and pagination....
>
> Right. I started to write a paragraph about this, and then removed it for simplicity.
>
> I think handling transforms on split block element is easier, because they are not irregularly shaped. One approach would be to simply draw the two halves of a split block as if the transform had been applied before the box was split.

But then what exactly is the point of 2D transforms? In the context of
page layout, I have always thought that 2D transforms primarily serve
two purposes: (1) to allow fake italics, and (2) to allow glyphs to be
rotated 180° (many IPA letters were obviously originally created this
way). If transforms are only applied to block level elements, however,
then I’m not seeing an obvious use. I must be missing something
obvious?
-- 
cheers,
-ambrose

Received on Tuesday, 16 November 2010 06:36:45 UTC