- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 13:21:48 -0700
- To: Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>
- Cc: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wednesday 2010-10-27 13:17 -0700, Chris Marrin wrote: > I agree. Seems like the better syntax would be: > > [ none | all | IDENT ] [ none | all | IDENT ]* > > Does that look right? If you add a comma, yes. > If so, then the rule would be that a 'none' in the list would turn > off transitions on all properties. The corresponding duration > would be ignored. An 'all' would turn transitions on for all > properties and would set their duration to the corresponding one. > Specific property names later in the list would override these. > That seems like the most logical rule to me. Are you're saying you'd want an occurrence of 'none' to override values earlier/later in the list, or just that 'none' would trigger transitions on no properties (and thus cause an item in the duration/timing-function/delay lists to be skipped)? -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 20:22:22 UTC