W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [css3-animations] non-animatable values of animatable properties

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 08:44:56 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTinq+epJUo+m08Pobh=c_kEq4s28dg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Sylvain Galineau
<sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> [David Baron:]
>> On Saturday 2011-04-16 08:24 -0700, L. David Baron wrote:
>> > One more question about this behavior (which I don't see the spec
>> > answering):  when some of the adjacent pairs of values of a property
>> > aren't animatable, what happens?  All the spec says about
>> > non-animatable situations is:
>> >   # Properties that are unable to be animated are ignored in these
>> >   # rules, with the exception of animation-timing-function', the
>> >   # behavior of which is described below.
>> >   -- http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-animations/#keyframes
>>
>> The behavior I implemented for now is that if some of the pairs of values
>> for a property aren't animatable, I drop the property from the animation
>> (even if some of the pairs of values are animatable).
>> This seemed like the most reasonable behavior I could come up with, at
>> least until we have animation of non-interpolable properties.
>>
>> (In this model, dropping a single segment feels much wierder since each
>> property has its own set of segments, though I suppose it's an
>> option.)
>
> I was hoping you could provide a quick testcase so I'm sure I understand
> what you mean by adjacent pairs of values of a property in this case ?

Something like:

@keyframes foo {
  0% { width: 20px; }
 50% { width: 40px; }
100% { width: auto; }
}

(20px,40px) is one pair, and (40px,auto) is the other.  The former is
animatable, the latter isn't.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 22 April 2011 15:45:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:39 GMT