W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2011

Re: [css3-2d-transforms] "longhand" for the transform stack

From: Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:11:12 -0700
Cc: "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-id: <4914B821-6F6B-4B8E-B3A2-374256B0618D@apple.com>
To: Aaron Gustafson <aaron@easy-designs.net>

On Mar 28, 2011, at 2:49 PM, Aaron Gustafson wrote:

> ...I don't think the current transform is too confusing,
> I can't say I'm surprised... you work at Apple. You're no doubt quite close to the implementation as it is right now, so of course it makes sense to you. 
> I'm not debating the power and flexibility of the current transform proposal, but I am trying to figure out if there's a better/alternate way to provide access to the power of transform that is easier for authors to wrap their heads around and that serves their actual needs (rather than hypothetical ones). I find the current implementation lacking in that area.

When I first started with CSS I found selectors completely incomprehensible and good for nothing but making simple content a confusing mishmash of nonsensical and unintelligible gibberish. I still don't know how to use selectors very well, but I understand why they are they way they are. The point is that everything has a learning curve. 

The design of transforms, transformation hierarchies and matrix representations isn't something that we came up with off the top of our heads, nor are SVG transforms a harebrained idea from that group. These are concepts that have existed in other disciplines that are just now making their way into HTML content.

If we did what you propose we would essentially be adding implicit transformation hierarchies within each node, which would be complicated to implement and to specify how they interact with the rest of the system. Complicating the implementation would make it buggy and slow and complicating the spec would make it harder for authors to understand how to use it, which is what you're trying to avoid.

As far as the current specification being impractical, I guess only time will tell. But there's already plenty of content out there which seems to be making good use of the current functionality.

Admittedly some of us are very close, maybe too close to the implementation to understand the author's plight. But many designers have given their input throughout the process which been instrumental in its development. 

Come on, just try it... :-)

Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2011 23:11:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:57 UTC