W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

Re: [css3-animations] Override of animation rule by !important

From: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:49:27 +0100
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "Sylvain Galineau" <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <op.v8lh8pm0bunlto@oyvinds-desktop>
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 04:48:53 +0100, Sylvain Galineau  
<sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:

> [Øyvind Stenhaug:]

>> This is about the first question, quoted further up, right? I.e. the  
>> case
>> where :hover starts applying? If so, then yes, some value between red  
>> and
>> green would be the start value. *If* there should be a transition at  
>> all.
> Any reason why it shouldn't ?

I don't know, I suppose it depends what authors would want. The  
"Automatically reversing transitions" chapter of Transitions seems to  
suggest that symmetry is desired, which seems difficult to achieve  

>> If you try changing the style of an element from "animation: none;
>> transition: color 1s;" to "animation: colorChange 4s; transition: color
>> 1s;", neither Gecko nor WebKit will transition.
> I wouldn't expect them to. " Implementations must not start a transition
> when the computed value of a property changes as a result of declarative
> animation (as opposed to scripted animation)."
> The issue in the testcase above is that a :hover is making an update on
> top of a running animation. (Not something implementations support today
> afaik)

Right. To me the cases don't really seem all that different, I see it as a  
computed value changing from an animating one to a non-animating one, or  
vice versa.

Øyvind Stenhaug
Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 15:49:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:54 UTC