IssueTracker

sure we can have Modifier.shadow. The general pattern is is to drop the draw prefix and match the name of the modifier with the field on the layer itself instead of deviating with Opacity vs alpha (should change to alpha)

I am apprehensive about keeping the scale/rotation parameters separate as it is a deviation from the atomic transformation done in drawLayer currently. That is the pivot point used for scale/rotation is shared and the order of the transformations is always fixed.

Most of the time folks are only interested in the "regular" rotation which is rotateZ. I think we should have distinct rotationX/Y methods

I think we need to decouple the layer primitive from the modifier. For example, the graphics/DrawScope API doesn't deal with Modifiers at all, and the Modifier should wrap that Layer primitive instead. This would still allow for usage of translate within the Layer primitive for graphics purposes. Modifier.offset will always be slower than Modifier.translate though and force a full layout pass instead of just a quick invalidation so we are paying a performance penalty if we only expose Modifier.offsetPx

The discussion came up in this API council feedback doc regarding renaming Modifier.drawLayer to Modifier.graphicsLayer: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JBwAbh_gwssah1X21waDpbS1f7M6yNbb3V8qanTlWds/edit?ts=5f5fd265