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

Re: transitions vs. animations

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:26:08 -0400
To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <20100320022608.GA16372@pickering.dbaron.org>
On Friday 2010-03-19 16:58 -0700, Simon Fraser wrote:
> > For example, I could imagine merging the properties as follows:
> > 
> > * combine animation-name and transition-property using a functional
> >   syntax, like:
> >     animation-???: transition(color), keyframes(wobble)
> >   where 'animation-???: transition(color)' == 'transition-property: color'
> >   and 'animation-???: keyframes(wobble)' == 'animation-name: wobble'
> > 
> > * make animation-duration, animation-delay, and
> >   animation-timing-function (and maybe also animation-play-state,
> >   if it's kept) apply to both types of animations (keyframe and
> >   transition)
> 
> But this prevents you from using a different duration for the transition and
> animation.

I don't think it does, since the normal use would be via the
shorthand, and all the properties are comma-separated lists:

  animation: keyframes(wobble) 2s 3, transition(color) 6s;

(Again, an additive cascade would be helpful here, but that's also
true of animations and transitions on their own.)

-David

-- 
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Saturday, 20 March 2010 02:26:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:25 GMT