- From: Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 08:08:25 +0200
- To: Jihye Hong <jh.hong@lge.com>
- Cc: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>, Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 5 October 2016 at 19:13, Jihye Hong <jh.hong@lge.com> wrote: > On 5 October 2016 at 11:11, Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 1 October 2016 at 03:31, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com> wrote: >>> Coming back to offset: Amelia says "nor can the net effect be defined as a >>> single offset from a base position". But .. it can. The net effect is >>> exactly an offset of offset-distance along the offset-path (which is a path >>> in the normal CSS+SVG sense of the word path), modified by the >>> offset-rotation (which is just a rotation). How the offset and rotation >>> applies to the element is controlled by offset-anchor, and the path itself >>> is tied back to the global geometry via offset-position. >> >> As the net effect of the properties is not a motion but an offset, >> maybe the module itself should get renamed to something like 'Offset >> Path Module' or just 'Offset Module'? > > We also talked about this when it was decided to rename motion-* properties, but no decision has yet been made. Are there minutes for this? >>> This name actually makes the most sense of anything we've come up with. It >>> doesn't step on existing terms (except for 'offset' from Web Animations, >>> which admittedly is a shame) and it's really descriptive of what the feature >>> does - without modifying layout or the geometry of an element, it offsets >>> the position of that element in some well-defined way. >> >> In regard of this, I had another idea. The prefix could be >> 'offset-path' instead of just 'offset'. Then the properties would be >> named like this: >> >> offset-path-shape >> offset-path-distance >> offset-path-position >> offset-path-anchor >> offset-path-rotation >> offset-path >> >> This resolves the conflicts with Web Animations and Logical Properties >> and keeps the meaning of the properties, only their names get a bit >> longer. > > The idea seems reasonable, but there are some properties used without the path - such as offset-anchor, offset-rotation. > Those are applied to the element itself, not to the path. While the offset rotation applies to the element itself, the property name 'offset-path-rotation' could be interpreted as the anchor and rotation *along* the path. This also applies to the anchor, but regarding the name 'offset-path-anchor' it may not be that obvious, though. Both could be renamed to something like 'offset-path-element-rotation' and 'offset-path-element-anchor' or just 'offset-element-rotation' and 'offset-element-anchor'. 'offset-anchor' may actually be renamed to '*-origin' to be consistent with 'transform-origin' defined in the CSS Transforms Module. I didn't give that a deeper thought yet, but as they are related to transformations, those two properties might even be merged into the CSS Transforms Module instead. I.e. extend the rotate() function of the 'transform' property so that it also takes the keywords of 'offset-anchor', and get rid of 'offset-anchor' in favor of using 'transform-origin'. So the syntax for rotate() would look like this: rotate( [ auto | reverse ] || <angle> ) Sebastian
Received on Thursday, 6 October 2016 06:09:14 UTC