W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2014

Re: [css-transforms] Making 'transform' match author expectations better with specialized 'rotate'/etc shorthands

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 09:03:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDqsmo-=9AF4GFTbJi-ALfBCURqNy63yBFa6t6HjgSQVw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Cc: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
> What if we actually want to describe the desired behavior after all transformation? Without thinking about the intermediate steps and states? You know upfront that you want to rotate by 90 degree and that you want to have the object positioned 200px right from it’s current position. With CSS Transforms you either need to modify the order of the transformation or use a different approach like: rotate(90deg) translateY(200px).
> Shane’s approach is that you don’t need to think about all intermediate steps and just *describe* the desired transformed behavior at the end upfront. Since we do not allow the ‘translate’ property to apply more than once it is the same like setting up a fixed order.

Yes, exactly. "describe the end result" is what I've been trying to
say with "independent" and "local" and all the rest.
translate/rotate/scale would just be three thematically similar but
otherwise unrelated properties.  And as it so happens, when you limit
yourself to these three types of transformations, you can implement
their behavior by prepending them to 'transform' in a specific order,
but that's an implementation detail, and has no relevance for authors.

Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 16:03:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:44 UTC