W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: [css3-transforms] ... interpolation wording

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 08:22:33 -0700
To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
CC: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B78CEB7A-7508-4874-AA35-1341EB574923@adobe.com>

On Jun 4, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann wrote:

> Dirk Schulze:
> ...
>> 
>>> Maybe the word 'keyframe' indicates the second option, not sure,
>>> if I understand this correctly, because the draft does not define what
>>> a keyframe is (related to SVG/SMIL animations, I think, in the
>>> draft about CSS animation this word is defined, but has no formal
>>> relation to SVG/SMIL animations - and it would be only confusing
>>> to require reading drafts about CSS animation to get
>>> SVG/SMIL animation about transform values right - therefore
>>> if 15 is intended to be applicable for both types of animation,
>>> a few words need to be chosen more carefully to avoid
>>> misunderstandings).
>> 
>> There were concerns raised about this wording before. I tried to change the
>> wording, so that it is not specific to any kind of animation, but describes
>> interpolation between two transform function lists. See [3]. Would be happy
>> to get your opinion about the change.
>> 
> 
> Would be better for avoid 'from' and 'to' at all.
> Better variant is maybe more something like this:
> 
> '
> When animating or transitioning transforms, the transform function lists must 
> be interpolated. For interpolation between two transform functions lists A 
> and B the rules described below are applied.
> 
> * If both the A and B are ‘none’:
I suggested 'source' and 'destination', but your proposal sounds good as well.

Greetings,
Dirk

> 
> ...
> '
> Olaf
> 
> 
>> [3] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-transforms/#animation
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 4 June 2012 16:51:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 June 2012 16:51:55 GMT