This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Add optional translation arguments to define a scale origin. Adding this bug for the records from: http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/FX-Taskforce/2DTransformsToDoList I don't think that this is necessary.
Was there any list/F2F discussion on this one? It's not totally clear to me that it's necessary.
(In reply to comment #1) > Was there any list/F2F discussion on this one? It's not totally clear to me > that it's necessary. Well, it may is reasonable like rotate with three arguments in bug 15508. It makes it easier to scale a region from a certain origin for authors. Specifying the origin for a certain transformation function in a list of functions makes it easier, than translating to the new origin and - more difficult - translate back on your self. So when I think about that, it can be an improvement for the author. The question would be how to specify that, since the second scale argument is optional: scale(<number>[, <number>][, <length>, <length>]) ? So either have one, two or four arguments? The same for scale3d?
(In reply to comment #2) > scale(<number>[, <number>][, <length>, <length>]) ? So either have one, two or > four arguments? The same for scale3d? 1-4 arguments, there are four possibilities, sorry. 1-2 arguments: scale from the current origin, 3-4 arguments: scale from the given origin. For 3 arguments: scale vertical and horizontal from the given position.
transform-origin handles the case where the author wants a different origin for the list of transforms. I think it's pretty rare to want a different origin for just a scale; I've never needed it.
(In reply to comment #4) > transform-origin handles the case where the author wants a different origin for > the list of transforms. I think it's pretty rare to want a different origin for > just a scale; I've never needed it. I wouldn't say that it has a strong requirement, but just because it is easy to surround a scale with two translations and both are really easy to calculate. Nevertheless, I am fine if we don't add it to the specification. I just wanted to make sure that we don't miss a raised concern and discussed every option.
We won't support new syntax for CSS3 Transforms transformation functions. Maybe in later versions.