W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2015

Re: [css-transforms] Scale property

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 06:46:00 -0400
Message-ID: <55814FE8.6030003@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 06/17/2015 04:06 AM, Shane Stephens wrote:
> Hi list,
> Should 'scale: 2' be equivalent to 'transform: scale(2)' or 'transform: scale(2, 1)'?
> Clearly, 'scale: 2 2' should not expand to 'transform: scale3D(2, 2, 2)'. Is it better to be inconsistent between the one
> value and two value cases of the scale property, or to be inconsistent between the scale property and the scale transform
> function?

scale: 2 should scale in both dimensions.

a) Makes way more sense as a first impression
b) Matches the way scale() handles having only one argument!
c) Omitted values in CSS for symmetric properties are usually repeated, not defaulted.
    (I screwed this up for background-size, please don't copy the mistake. :)

Received on Wednesday, 17 June 2015 10:48:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:54 UTC