- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 07:59:35 +0000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Jul 14, 2014, at 9:23 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > On 07/11/2014 11:42 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> Earlier today I saw a Twitter thread started by Lea >> <https://twitter.com/LeaVerou/status/487350702386479105> about how she >> commonly accidentally types the name of the transform she wants as the >> property (like "rotate: 45deg;") and then has to go back and correct >> it afterwards. Several other devs chimed in that they do this as >> well, and I know that I've done it a few times (especially when using >> SVG - I use "transform='translate(...)'" so often that I commonly try >> to name the attribute "translate" first). >> >> Since this is something that devs trip over so much, it might be worth >> accommodating it in the syntax. I think we can do this compatibly >> with the current syntax. Here's a proposal: > > Having read the thread so far, I think this is a problem worth solving. > However, I agree with most of Dirk's and all of Sylvain's comments, so > I'm in support of a proposal that incorporates their feedback. > > On that note, if there needs to be separate origins for the longhands, > they should not be handled as origin() functions as you propose [1], > since you generally want to cascade the origin and the value independently. > > An origin() function might be useful for translate-list, however, to > avoid the awkward translate-untranslate pattern Dirk mentions [2]. > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Jul/0207.html > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Jul/0202.html > > Regardless, this should almost certainly go into a Transforms Level 2 > draft, since the set of features in Level 1 has already shipped. To > that end, it would be nice to have Transforms in CR sometime soon. :) Yes. During the Paris F2F (that Tab mentions), we agreed that new functionalities would go into a next level. I don’t think that Tab actually proposes to edit the first level of the spec. Greetings, Dirk PS Regarding CR for Level 1: Simon and I proposed a new model for 3D transform handling during Seattle F2F at the beginning of this year. The proposal addresses most issues of the spec. Simon spend a lot of efforts creating a specification text and resolve more of the remaining issues. We were/are kindly asking everyone to review the text so that we can proceed with CSS Transforms 1. The current discussion is here[2]. [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mNF7Z67WnnV05RqXa37PmfvRbgAZwj7-h-7Y_uQ_UPE/edit?pli=1# [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0709.html > > ~fantasai >
Received on Monday, 14 July 2014 08:00:22 UTC