- From: Menard, Alexis <alexis.menard@intel.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 12:33:31 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Hi, On Aug 16, 2013, at 5:02 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> More important, though, is the question of what to do when *all* the >> keywords are valid for animation-* properties. Which, if any, are the >> animation-name value? I believe browsers are inconsistent here. > > To be more specific, here are some examples. > > Is "animation: ease-in backwards;" equivalent to "animation: foo > backwards;" (take first when ambiguous), "animation: ease-in foo;" > (take last when ambiguous), or "animation: none ease-in backwards;" > (only take animation name when *not* doing so would be an error). > > What about "animation: ease-in ease-out backwards;"? > > Alternately, could we simplify things and just always take the first > keyword as animation-name? Then we'll need to update the definition of the animation, right now it uses "||" which mean they can come in any order. I'm fine with aligning the parsing in Blink if needed but this is a significant behaviour change, I'm wondering what others think about it, could it break lot of stuff around? Thanks. > > ~TJ >
Received on Monday, 19 August 2013 12:33:59 UTC