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

Re: Using CSS Transitions/Animations with SVG attributes

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:13:04 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=nTY3g9oSrdZMDy2rHZWB+5o6WE0fJR3XXxyDz@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 3/15/11 6:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>
>> At the 15Mar2011 FXTF conference call, we discussed the proposals for
>> applying CSS Transitions and Animations to SVG.
>
> I have to ask.  Is there a reason SMIL is insufficient here?  Last I
> checked, that works pretty well for SVG...

The biggest problem with SMIL is that it's not CSS.  ^_^  It's a
different animation model that's only applicable to SVG (plus maybe
other languages that aren't really part of the web).  It won't ever be
applicable to HTML.  CSS Transitions/Animations are already usable
across HTML, and on the handful of SVG attributes that are currently
mapped to properties (the list of which is pretty arbitrary).  It
appears that CSS T/A is the most reasonable way forward if we want a
single animation model for the web (which seems like a desirable
goal).

Basically, it would suck if authors have to learn two vaguely similar
animation models just so they can use SVG and HTML together.  It would
also suck if the two animation models had different capabilities.
SMIL is more powerful than CSS T/A right now, but I expect CSS T/A to
grow in capability and eventually match and exceed SMIL's power in
most areas.

While we won't ever get rid of SMIL, given the weight of SVG 1.1
content on the web, we can at least make it unimportant for new
authors to learn.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 18 March 2011 16:13:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:38 GMT