- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:09:54 -0800
- To: Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>
- Cc: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wednesday 2010-11-17 17:03 -0800, Brendan Kenny wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:36 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > > On Wednesday 2010-11-17 22:31 +0000, Sylvain Galineau wrote: > >> The current CSS3 2D Transforms spec [1] defines the matrix function as taking six > >> values of type <number>. > >> > >> Firefox 4 Beta 7, however, seems to require e and f to be of type <length>. As > >> these map to the x and y of the translate*() functions, I can understand the > >> connection. This is, however, the only implementation to do this today. > >> > >> I was curious to know whether this was by design. > > > > It was. I proposed changing the spec here: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Oct/0360.html > > and got no response. > > > > That of course makes sense for the translate function, but I find it > confusing in the matrix function. Thinking of 2d translations as > shears in 3d space (or P2), the units are already implicit in the > space, making the units on e and f into just additional multipliers. The units are implicit in the space according to what? As far as I know, CSS doesn't define pixels as more basic than other units. Those components of the matrix really do have different dimensions. -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Thursday, 18 November 2010 01:10:25 UTC