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

Re: [css3-animations] Possible spec bug?

From: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:34:48 +0200
Message-ID: <4EAFBD38.1000207@gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 31/10/11 18:17, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug<oyvinds@opera.com>  wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 23:02:48 +0200, Lea Verou<leaverou@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> Check this out: http://jsfiddle.net/leaverou/jwHva/2/
>>>
>>> If you remove border-style: solid; from the div {...} rule, the animation
>>> stops having a visible effect, even though both the interpolated values
>>> contain border-style:solid; (in the shorthand). This doesn't change even
>>> with animation-fill-mode: both; It happens in both Webkit and Mozilla, so
>>> it's probably not a browser bug.
>> I believe the problem is that the spec says this:
>>
>> "Properties that are unable to be animated are ignored in these rules"
>>
>> Since border-*-style is not animatable, putting 'solid' in the keyframes
>> doesn't do anything.
> Ah, that makes even more sense.  Damn you, non-transitionable keywords!
>
> ~TJ
Then maybe that needs to change, as it breaks author expectations. If 
somebody put a non-animatable value in a keyframe, it's almost certain 
they didn't intend it to be ignored.
Those values could be "animated" via a discrete step, either in the 
beginning, middle or end of the time between those two keyframes.
History has proved that more relaxed syntax is always better than making 
things invalid or ignored.

-- 
Lea Verou (http://leaverou.me | @LeaVerou)
Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2011 09:42:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:46 GMT