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

On Oct 12, 2012, at 9:36 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:

> Variables are a geberic mechanism which can do many things, one of which is to replace the need for this kind of long hand. If this was the only thing variables did, you could say that they are made unnecessary by the addition of longhands, but variables can do other things, and so will stay around.
> 
Yes, variables can be useful. I am not questioning that. And you can use variables for a lot of useful stuff where -x/-y properties won't help at all.

> On the other hand, the -x and -y properties do not add anything that cannot be achieved through variables AND cause problems with logical directions. If something is unnecessary and problematic, why have it?
They are used for animations and transitions already. I would actually say that they are very logical. For instance when you want to move the origin just in one dimension. It seems a lot more logical to just set and animate a -x/-y property if that is all you want. Specifying them does not hurt anyone IMO.

Greetings,
Dirk

> 
> Florian
> 
> 
>>> 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.
>> Or you come to the opposite conclusion, now that we have transition and
>> animation.
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 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 16:49:46 UTC