W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2012

RE: [css3-transforms] Behavior on UAs without 3D support

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 22:08:05 +0000
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3C4041FF83E1E04A986B6DC50F017829099573FD@TK5EX14MBXC295.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

[Boris Zbarsky:]
> On 5/1/12 5:25 PM, Dirk Schulze wrote:
> > 3) 3D transform functions are treated as invalid if a UA just supports
> 2D. In this case any property settings are rejected if a 3D transform was
> found. Independent if 2D transforms are included in this list as well.
> This gives the author the possibility to provide two different transforms.
> One for UA's with and one for UAs without 3D support:
> This seems like the right approach to me for a UA that doesn't want to do
> 3D.  This is certainly how it would work if they were separate modules and
> the UA just did not support the 3D module.
I agree. It's also consistent with what happens with existing UAs that support
2D but not 3D e.g. IE9. I don't think we'd want authors to have to feature-detect
which kind of feature non-support they're dealing with...
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2012 22:08:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:14 UTC