Re: Transforms on inline elements

That seems reasonable to me.

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:11 PM, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote:

> Basing what to do off
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#box-decoration-break
>
> (or a similar new property) might be interesting.
>
> dave
> (hyatt@apple.com)
>
> On Nov 16, 2010, at 2:56 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>
>
> Couldn't the same approach be taken for inlines? This just sounds like a
> third option.
>
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 11/16/10 1:23 AM, Simon Fraser wrote:
>>
>>> I think handling transforms on split block element is easier, because
>>> they are not irregularly shaped
>>>
>>
>> Is that true, though?  How are blocks splitting across columns any more
>> regularly shaped than inlines splitting across lines?
>
>
> I think that transforming using the bounding box of the individual boxes is
> the simplest solution. It does what the developer wants in most cases and
> has well-defined behavior in the cases where it has unexpected behavior.
> Also, I think in the cases where it has unexpected behavior, it's relatively
> straightforward to understand what's going on.
>
> It doesn't seem like there was any opposition to this approach in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Aug/0615.html, although
> Boris was maybe skeptical it was actually less confusing.
>
> Ojan
>
>
>