Re: Transformed Pointer Coordinates?

On Feb 12, 2013, at 9:29 AM, Rik Cabanier <> wrote:

> I agree. The vast majority of people are just interested in the 2d transform.

At the moment yes. And for Pointer events you are probably not interested in a 3D point as well. I think we all agree in that. When it comes to the interface description, I don't see a reason to create two different interfaces. Better to make z=0 and w=1.

> Another issue with 3d is how transform-style [1] is treated.
> for intstance:
> <div id="a">
> <div style="transform: rotate3d(...); transform-style: preserve-3d">
> <div id="b" style="transform: rotate3d(...); transform-style: flat">

> Does it make sense to transform point between a and b?

For NodeToNode transformation it probably does not make sense and an DOMException should be raised. For node to page, I think, WebKit still returns a 2D point at the moment.


> 1:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Robert O'Callahan <> wrote:
> Maybe I'm wrong but I feel like it would be best to keep 2D points and 3D points as separate interfaces. We don't want Web authors to wonder what "z" and "w" mean for the result of convertPointFromNode.
> Rob
> -- 
> Wrfhf pnyyrq gurz gbtrgure naq fnvq, “Lbh xabj gung gur ehyref bs gur Tragvyrf ybeq vg bire gurz, naq gurve uvtu bssvpvnyf rkrepvfr nhgubevgl bire gurz. Abg fb jvgu lbh. Vafgrnq, jubrire jnagf gb orpbzr terng nzbat lbh zhfg or lbhe freinag, naq jubrire jnagf gb or svefg zhfg or lbhe fynir — whfg nf gur Fba bs Zna qvq abg pbzr gb or freirq, ohg gb freir, naq gb tvir uvf yvsr nf n enafbz sbe znal.” [Znggurj 20:25-28]

Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 18:33:32 UTC