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

Re: [css3-animations] invalid values in keyframes

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:39:28 +1300
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Jennifer Yu <Jennifer.Yu@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20111115023928.GA29438@pickering.dbaron.org>
On Monday 2011-11-14 18:35 -0800, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Jennifer Yu <Jennifer.Yu@microsoft.com> wrote:
> > What should this animation look like?
> >
> > @keyframes anim1 {
> >                 0% {color: red; left: 10px;}
> >                 50% { color: notARealColor; left: 20px; }
> >                 100% { color: yellow; left: 90px; }
> > }
> >
> > Should the specified color property value at 50% effectively be ignored as
> > if it were not specified? Or should the whole animation of the color
> > property be ignored? Or, taking it to a further extreme, should the entire
> > animation be ignored?
> >
> > It seems more natural to just ignore the specified color value. However,
> > preventing some of the animation from running would be a clear indicator to
> > a web author that there’s a problem with his defined animation.
> 
> That would break forward-compatible parsing.  Only the single invalid
> declaration should be ignored, so that authors can do the standard
> "provide multiple versions of a property" style of fallback.

Agreed.  It should behave as though 'color' was not specified in the
50% keyframe.

So, to answer the original question, in that animation, color should
animate from red at 0% to yellow at 100%, and left should animate
from 10px at 0% to 20px at 50% to 90px at 100%.

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2011 02:40:06 GMT

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