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

Re: transitions vs. animations

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:05:30 -0700
Message-ID: <dd0fbad1003200805r7853e8bjac7060c66344ebf1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
> However, most of the uses we've had for animations have been
> more of the "put the element into an animating state" kind, for
> example ambient animations.

Yeah, understood.  Animations are roughly meant to either be
continuous, or be script-triggered.

>> A better solution might be to be able to tie an animation *to* a
>> transition, so that it can work on the somewhat easier model that
>> transitions use.  I'm not sure what a sensical syntax would be for
>> this, though.
>
> The best solution for this particular problem would be to allow
> keyframes for transitions. This seems like an obvious addition,
> until you realize that you'd like to be able to code your keyframes
> using values that are computed relative to the end states, so you end up
> requiring  weird units like percentages of percentages.

That's what I was trying to get at.  I'd like to spend some time
working on this, to see if we can find a natural way to do it.

~TJ
Received on Saturday, 20 March 2010 15:06:22 GMT

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