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

Re: [css3-transforms] Should the spec have a transform-origin-x/y

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 02:03:04 -0700
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
CC: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5F56E66B-5241-4DF2-A065-780A400D7317@adobe.com>
Hi Florian,

On Oct 1, 2012, at 12:47 AM, "Florian Rivoal" <florian@rivoal.net<mailto:florian@rivoal.net>> wrote:

Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com<mailto:dschulze@adobe.com>> wrote:

On Sep 27, 2012, at 9:46 AM, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU<mailto:bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>> wrote:

Apparently WebKit implements transform-origin-x and
properties.  Should these be in the spec, perhaps?

They are frequently used. But so far no one had interests in
implementing beside webkit. (According to various in person

I don't mind specifying them.

I think we should not specify and implement them. I acknowledge they they are useful, but like all -x and -y properties:

1) if we later decide we sometimes also want to declare things in terms of logical directions, we're stuck, as it isn't possible to simultaneously have a -start and -head. By keeping a single property, things like this stay possible:
transform-origin: start 13px head 10px;
I don't know what 'start' and 'head' would mean in this context, but there is no problem to extend the -x and -y properties and therefore the shorthand later.

2) users who want them can easily simulate then using varaibles:
* { transform-origin: var(x,0) var(y,0); }
#foo { var-x: 13px; var-y: 42px; }
No one wants to replace transform-origin shorthand. It would just be up to the author how he uses the properties.


- Florian
Received on Monday, 1 October 2012 09:03:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:22 UTC