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

Re: [css3-animations] display:none, visibility:hidden and animations

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:12:20 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDD+Rfz-VkJ8udg+nfKHijj+6QbdtGUt7SoCu8CPTx6dEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Jennifer Yu <Jennifer.Yu@microsoft.com>
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Sylvain Galineau
<sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:
> This follows up on a thread this past July [1] that never reached a clear conclusion as we ended up discussing ways of synchronizing multiple animations since display:none can be used for that purpose in Webkit.
>
> One could say that display and animation properties are orthogonal to one another i.e. the latter animates properties, the latter what kind of box an element generates. So animations on a display:none element are run so that querying the animated properties along the way will return the expected values; and the visual result of turning the element back to display != none would reflect the current state of the animation. This would be true for the animated children of a display:none parent, as well as for visibility:hidden elements and their children.
>
> This would also be consistent with what would happen if your animation was entirely script-based with no use of CSS3 Animations.
>
> Besides the implementation/runtime cost of managing invisible animations, what are the issues with this model ?
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jul/0267.html

I don't believe there are any issues.  This is clearly the correct
model.  There is no reason whatsoever for 'display' to have an effect
on what animations run.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 29 September 2011 21:13:08 GMT

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