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

Re: [css3-transitions] Back-tracking transition-timing-function

From: Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 02:33:39 +0000
Message-ID: <k2n34df39071005051933i6d2135efjcbc749b3f0ba715d@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Meiburg <timeroot.alex@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
I modified my local build of webkit to remove the limitations on the timing
function and everything just works (famous last words).

erik


On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 19:20, Alex Meiburg <timeroot.alex@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nice necro. ;-)
>
> I thought about it, I suppose it wouldn't have to be invertible then, would
> it? Only single-valued as it stands, but bounce animations shouldn't break
> anything...
>
> As was already meantioned, though, limiting the coordinates to the unit
> square prevent and bouncing. It seems that one could have legitimate
> functions, then, with the coordinates extended over the [0,1] range in the x
> or y direction.
>
> ~6 out of 5 statisticians say that the number of statistics that either
> make no sense or use ridiculous timescales at all has dropped over 164% in
> the last 5.62474396842 years.
>
>  On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 17:29, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Within that range, you're guaranteed that the curve will be
>>> monotonically increasing (or maybe just non-decreasing?), and thus is
>>> invertible.
>>
>>
>> Why is that a requirement? Removing the limitation allows bounce like
>> animations without the need to switch to using keyframes.
>>
>> --
>> erik
>>
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 6 May 2010 02:34:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:27 GMT