Re: [css-transforms] Why doesn't perspective-origin just use <position>?

On Jun 17, 2015 9:42 AM, "Simon Fraser" <> wrote:
>> On Jun 12, 2015, at 11:54 PM, Dirk Schulze <> wrote:
>>> On Apr 8, 2015, at 4:37 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <> wrote:
>>> The 'perspective-origin' property specifies a point in a 2d box.  Why
>>> isn't its grammar just using the <position> production?  It looks like
>>> it's reusing the 'transform-origin' grammar, but without the 3rd
>>> coordinate.
>>> <position> is complicated enough that it's annoying to parse a grammar
>>> near it to figure out what's different/excluded.
>> I don’t know of a specific reason why we don’t use <position> on
>> It looks like Gecko parses it the same way as transform-origin but
without the z coordinate.
>> WebKit and Blink use a special function just for perspective-origin.
Both can probably use <position>.
>> Would implementations be willing to change?
> I forget if we’ve talked about this in the past, but we did have
discussion around transform-origin and background-position here:
> <>
Yeah, transform-origin (unfortunately) can't just use <position>. (Damn
that 3-value syntax form!) But perspective-origin is 2d, so doesn't have
the same problem.


Received on Wednesday, 17 June 2015 19:10:54 UTC