W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2013

Re: [css-ui] transformed outline interoperability

From: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 07:59:06 -0700
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CE3CC67F.B671%galineau@adobe.com>


On 8/22/13 10:14 AM, "Florian Rivoal" <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 16:27:44 +0200, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> I think it would be weird and ugly if the outline did not transform in
>> 3d too, whether it was being used as a purely decorative effect or to
>> show focusing. Why should the outline look bizarrely out of place and
>> buggy if I were to tilt the rest of my interface down into a 3d plane?
>> What if I had a very long form tilted into something like the Star Wars
>> 
>> opening scroll, with each focus bringing the input close and sending
>> everything above it further away? Presto's approach would just look
>>like  
>> a mistake in that case, and I'd probably need to resort to something
>> else to indicate focus (like box shadow).
>
>Well, I can see your point of the containing element of the outlined
>element is transformed, then having the outline match the context may
>make  
>sense. On the other hand, I am much less convinced about the outline of a
> 
>transformed element in a non transformed container.

Maybe I'm not reading this right, but are you saying you're not sure the
outline of an element rotated 60 degrees should reflect the rotation of
what it outlines? While I'm sure there are cases where you might want to
override this, it seems a very reasonable default.

Received on Friday, 23 August 2013 14:59:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:33 UTC