W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [cssom-view] Add a "smooth" parameter to scrollTo and scrollBy functions

From: Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 08:31:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CABZUbM10vwwc-zr6Xqqn7iHWgQ4fWZviH=dyS0WNJSNwZaqFBw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: "alice.lieutier@gmail.com" <alice.lieutier@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 3/27/13, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Brad -

> On Mar 27, 2013, at 12:36 PM, alice.lieutier@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Compare those two examples (navigate using the table on the left):
>>
>> http://lieutier.me/stuff/constantTime.html
>> http://lieutier.me/stuff/constantSpeed.html
>
Is this a competing feature to marquee-speed?

Indication of scrolling using CSS will be great. And what would be
better than making the actuator blink during that period and then stop
when it is done? For example:

nav a:focus ~ * :scrolling {
  text-decoration: blink;
  text-decoration-timing: ease-in-out;
}

What's better than that? (besides MARQUEE).

Perhaps we should be rethinking ideas for expanding MARQUEE.

> I actually kind of liked the second one better. It gave a better sense of
> how far apart things were. It would probably be better if it accelerated
> instead of going a constant speed though, so that close things wouldn't be
> quite so instant, and far things needn't take quite so long.
>
I much prefer the 'bounce' effect on scrolling. With blinking text. And ponies.
-- 
Garrett
Twitter: @xkit
personx.tumblr.com
Received on Monday, 1 April 2013 15:31:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:10 UTC