ISSUE-2233: adopt the syntax for CSS Transforms


adopt the syntax for CSS Transforms

Module: Transforms
Raised by:
Doug Schepers
Opened on:

* why not adopt the syntax for CSS Transforms (which was written to be
as compatible as possible with SVG)?

In particular, I see this:
AG: I agreed to remove translateX/Y/Z and scaleX/Y/Z
JF: translateX/Y is part of the CSS specification but that's just
syntactic sugar

While these might shortcuts look like syntactic sugar, they allow for
something important - which is the ability to break a transform list
into components that can manipulated individually. This is especially
important when you're animating between transforms (not necessarily
with CSS Animations, even JS gets the benefit). Flattening all the
transform operations is a lossy process (not in the final matrix
result, but you lose the list).

In general I'm not sure there is benefit in minimising the syntax.
What is the cost?
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. Minutes, Wednesday 8 April 2009 telcon (from on 2009-04-08)
  2. Re: transforms comments (from on 2009-03-18)
  3. ISSUE-2233 (transform-syntax): adopt the syntax for CSS Transforms [Module: Transforms] (from on 2009-03-18)

Related notes:

No additional notes.

Display change log ATOM feed

Dirk Schulze <>, Chair, Chris Lilley <>, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <>.
$Id: 2233.html,v 1.1 2020/01/17 13:20:32 carcone Exp $