- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:51:21 -0700
- To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Cc: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, Jet Villegas W3C <w3c@junglecode.net>, Cameron McCormack <heycam@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mozilla.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:07 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote: >> I still think it would be useful to resolve decisions on DOMPoint together >> with a view to the needs of DOMMatrix which uses a Point definition as well. >> The current definition of Point in DOMMatrix is a dictionary and should have >> been compatible with DOMPoint dictionary. It is my understanding that this >> does not need to be the case with an interface DOMPoint. Difference: >> DOMPoint just has the attributes 'x' and 'y'. Point in DOMMatrix has at >> least a third parameter 'z' and possibly a forth 'w' (needs a resolution). > > > We can just add 'z' and 'w' attributes to DOMPoint. Yeah, agreed. They'll just both be 0 when dealing with 2d things. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 16:52:09 UTC