W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2010

Re: transitions vs. animations

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 22:12:20 -0700
Message-ID: <o2tdd0fbad1004072212je40a345coc9815ea6384f737a@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk
<news@terrainformatica.com> wrote:
> I suspect that 'play-during' is too much.
>
> So far the only useful case for it is page load animations.

It also provides a useful ghetto for 'infinite' play-count animations,
which probably aren't appropriate for play-out animations.  Plus, hey,
no accidental clobbering of your "on-entry" and "constant" animations.

> But for that it
> is enough to have :ready state flag or so.
>
> Therefore
>
>   body:ready { play-in: ....; }
>
> will do exactly what you need.
>
> That :ready state flag is useful in other cases, e.g.
>
>   frame:not(:ready) { background: url( loading-in-progress.gif ); }
>   video:not(:ready) { ..... }
>   img:not(:ready) { ..... }

I agree that :ready would be useful for many things.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2010 05:13:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:26 GMT