Re: [css3-transforms][css4-background] Should the spec have {background,transform,perspective}-origin-x/y

>>> So I'm tagging this thread as [css4-background] as well, which I
>>> think should interest some additional folks in the conversation.
>> The main issue with background-position-x and background-position-y
>> is that they prevent the introduction of logical-keywords positions,
>> something the i18nwg has been requesting for many years and which
>> we deferred from L3 to L4. There's some discussion of the issue here:
> I can imagine cases where you want transform-origin to be writing-mode
> aware. For example, I might want to spin a line of text around the 5th  
> letter.

Agreed. Due to things like that, we should generally stay away from
introducing *-x and *-y properties, especially since they don't add
anything new to the platform now that we have variables.

In any situation where we are tempted to add a pair foo-x and
foo-y properties as longhands to an existing shorthand of the type
"foo: x y;", we need to remember that users can get the exact same
effect by manually setting "foo: var(x,0) var(y,0);" and then using
the var-x and var-y properties the way they would
have used the foo-x and foo-y properties.

- Florian

Received on Friday, 12 October 2012 12:33:58 UTC