- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 17:44:02 +0100
- To: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>
- Cc: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Sunday 2012-02-05 02:07 +0200, Lea Verou wrote: > Also, this is not a per-transform function issue. It's not something > that *some* transform functions need (in which case, it would make > sense to add it as a parameter). It's something *all* transform > functions need, hence it makes much more sense to be a separate > property. transform-origin isn't strictly needed at all. It's syntactic sugar. Use of any transform-origin other than the top-left is the same as adding translate(originX, originY) to the beginning of the transform list and translate(-originX, -originY) to the end of the transform list. I think providing the syntactic sugar for origins for the simple case is a reasonable compromise between ease-of-use and complexity, and I don't see a strong reason to change it. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Monday, 6 February 2012 16:44:31 UTC