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

Re: Are CSS animations a done deal?

From: Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 20:26:45 +0200
Message-ID: <4BB24265.4020707@keryx.se>
To: "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
2010-03-30 19:19, Chris Marrin skrev:

> Right. I've been reading files with CSS Animations, Transitions and
> Transforms in them for a long time. And it's not only
 > much easier to read such descriptions, it's easier to write them
> in a clear and easy to understand way.

This is my question:

Can we do animations in a declarative style that are equally clear and 
understandable, but is not CSS?

This thread has gotten replies defending the concept of declarative 
animation as such. Nobody is questioning that. At least I am not.

This thread has got replies about the intended usage of CSS animation, 
but NOT A SINGLE REPLY about user expectations in the event the 
technology gets abused.

A user that runs NoScript will still see CSS animations, is that an 
expected result? How long will it take until we see multiple bugs in 
Webkits's and Mozilla's bugzillas asking for a way to disable animations?

How are you preparing to handle the abuse?

And how are you going to handle the valid use cases when animations are 
triggered by all kinds of events? Why must library authors code around 
limitations in the technology that really serve no purpose except to 
preserve the details from the original idea?

Kudos to Apple for coming up with this idea, but can it not be improved?

I am not suggesting removing a tool from authors, but improving it.


-- 
Lars Gunther
http://keryx.se/
http://twitter.com/itpastorn/
http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/
Received on Tuesday, 30 March 2010 18:27:20 GMT

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