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

Re: when do transitions occur?

From: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:58:11 +0200
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.v1uxa9ukbunlto@oyvinds-desktop>
On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:38:21 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>  
wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:32 AM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>  
> wrote:
>> On Thursday 2011-09-15 08:12 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Brian Manthos  
>>> <brianman@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>> > Regarding David's comment about background-image not being  
>>> animatable, this WD suggests it is somewhat supported...
>>> > http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-transitions/#properties-from-css-
>>> > #       background-image        only gradients
>>>
>>> That's weird.  I *had* a definition for gradient transitions in Images
>>> 3, but I also had a definition for generic <image>s, and they were
>>> kicked to level 4 at the same time.  I dunno why Transitions would
>>> reference only gradients.
>>
>> The TR-page draft is quite old; the reference to background-image
>> being animatable at all has been dropped from the editor's draft for
>> quite a while.
>
> Right; it's just odd that it ever got into such a state.  I'm not sure
> if Image Values was ever in an in-between state where I defined how to
> transition gradients but not general images.

The Transitions spec itself makes some attempt at defining it (this part  
has not been dropped from the ED).

"gradient: interpolated via the positions and colors of each stop. They  
must have the same type (radial or linear) and same number of stops in  
order to be animated."

-- 
Øyvind Stenhaug
Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Thursday, 15 September 2011 15:58:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:44 GMT