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

Re: Proposal: will-animate property

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 13:29:32 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLaWkWanycSscbvLWAHjKSGvPUYG0nzrqRf0Th7uShEhQg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com>
Cc: Ali Juma <ajuma@chromium.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Matt Woodrow <matt@mozilla.com>, Cameron McCormack <cmccormack@mozilla.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote:
>
>> OK, we can make will-animate:foo induce a stacking context only if foo
>> does, but then I don't know how to fix the future-proofing problem. Maybe
>> it isn't a big problem and we don't need to fix it.
>>
>
> Is it possible and efficient to compute if a stacking context can be used
> without any visible side effects? Ideally we don't want to restrict
> optimizations that require a stack context all of the time internally at
> least.
>

In Gecko, at least, we can layerize pretty well whether or not a property
requires a stacking context. The problem is that some properties (opacity,
filter, etc) don't make any sense unless they induce a stacking context.
For those properties you want will-animate to induce a stacking context
because you want the rendering change, if any, to happen early.

Rob
-- 
Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2013 00:29:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:17 UTC