- From: Brian Birtles <bbirtles@mozilla.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:32:59 +0900
- To: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On 2015/10/09 7:51, Shane Stephens wrote: > > Any thoughts? > > > This seems like a really good idea. > > As an extra point - we don't need to solve custom animations (onsample > effects that modify the document) until L2, so we don't need to think > about this right now - but if we said that animations without a target > element belong to the document that the timeline they reference is > attached to then we might be able to deal with at least simple cases > here without resorting to exposing the map. That's a good point. In future timelines won't necessarily be attached to a document directly but we can probably define this association in terms of the active document when the timeline was created or something to that effect. I'll go ahead and make the change to the spec. Best regards, Brian
Received on Friday, 9 October 2015 06:33:31 UTC