Re: [round-display] [motion-path] Orientation of elements due to merging polar positioning and motion path

On 05/25/2016 05:34 PM, Shane Stephens wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:56 AM fantasai wrote:
>
>> On 05/19/2016 05:51 PM, Shane Stephens wrote:
>> >
>> >> This seems very counter-intuitive to me. I would not expect
>> >> the coordinate system of translate/rotate/scale/transform
>> >> to be affected by motion at all. The goal is for these all
>> >> to behave as if they were independent right? But with this
>> >> ordering they're not.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure that is a goal. Would you expect motion rotation
>> > to affect transforms? Or transforms to affect motion? You have
>> > to pick one. I think translate/scale/etc. should act the same
>> > as the transform property, and we can't split that up to insert
>> > motion components.
>>
>> I would expect them to be independent. I don't expect 'rotate'
>> to affect motion, nor motion to affect 'rotate'. I also don't
>> expect 'transform' to be affected by any of these, it should
>> apply on top as a final operation.
>
> I don't think that's possible unless you're happy for translate
> to behave differently to transform: translate.

I don't understand what you mean here... they should behave the same.
And neither should be affected by either 'motion-rotation' or 'rotate'.

>> The problem is that Gmail's email output HTML doesn't correctly
>> mark up quotations. (See bug above, which Gmail so far refuses
>> to fix because, I dunno. I keep having to fix up your quotations
>> when I reply because they are--from what I've been told by proxy--
>> adamant about not fixing this stupidly trivial bug.)
>
> Ah, damn. I can look into routing CSS emails to a different mail
> client, though that'll take some time.

It's fine. I can deal. I don't want you to switch mail clients...
I just want Gmail to either fix the bug or accept patches. :(

~fantasai