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 22:23:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDse=wywuScpO7vdab5ZSL2STLppWCNvDu6yLGqSvcoEw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>
Cc: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com> wrote:
>> As it turns out, you'd actually need to apply these in the order
>> translate, scale, rotate to get the result you've pointed out as natural.
>> And it's the fact that even obvious transform wizards like yourself get this
>> wrong which is motivating me to want us to add this affordance (Francois
>> made a very similar point).
> Ah, my bad. I just realized that you have the order correct. Sorry about
> that :) Substitute my confusion for your own.

I'm not sure which result he thought was natural, or which order he
thought was applying - it was unclear from the email - but the
"rotated rectangle" result is definitely what comes out of my
proposal.  The "squished diamond" isn't what you'd get from
independent properties; it comes from a TSR ordering.

Received on Thursday, 17 July 2014 05:24:45 UTC

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