- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:18:43 -0700
- To: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
- Cc: Erik Dahlström <erik@xn--dahlstrm-t4a.net>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com> wrote: > Erik: Are you suggesting that the `auto` value would use the viewBox as the > reference if `transform-origin` was set in absolute units, and `fill-box` as > a reference if it used percentages? > > That sounds very difficult to implement & unnecessarily confusing. What if > the `transform-origin` included calc() functions? Or was animated between > different values? An animation between 100px and 100% is implemented as an > animation between `calc(100px + 0%)` and `calc(0px + 100%)`. Yes, it's unofficially illegal (at the spec design level) for percentages to resolve differently than absolute lengths, for precisely the calc() issue you bring up. It makes % and px no longer comparable units, and requires us to have special spec prose defining how to combine them in a calc(). Some legacy values (like <position>) have that, but we're not adding it to anything else. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2015 18:19:30 UTC