Re: [css3-images] element() "ignoring" transforms

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:53 AM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> On Monday 2012-03-05 10:46 -0800, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com> wrote:
>> > Regarding the eleemnt() function, CSS3 Images says
>> >
>> > "If the referenced element has a transform applied to it or an ancestor,
>> > the transform must be ignored when rendering the element as an image.
>> > [[!CSS-TRANSFORMS]]"
>> >
>> > I think it's probably worth detailing what it means for a transform to be
>> > "ignored". Should it be as if the transform property were 'none'? Note
>> > that this would have some additional effects, since a transformed element
>> > normally acts as a containing block for fixed-position descendants, for
>> > instance (even if it's just an identity transform).
>>
>> I should specify that.  The intent is similar to how SVG defines this
>> kind of thing; that a "virtual" transform that's the inverse of the
>> CTM is applied after the element's transform.  Thus, the side-effects
>> you get from transforming the element (like becoming a fixpos
>> container) are still preserved.
>
> I'm not sure this is the right way to specify this:  inverting has
> different results if the element has or is inside an element with a
> sigular transform.  And I think element() should be able to capture
> something that's inside a singular transform (despite that that
> transform makes the original not show up).

Hmm, indeed.  I can weasel my way around that, since the "virtual
transform" isn't actually visible anywhere.

~TJ

Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 19:29:34 UTC