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

Re: Proposal: will-animate property

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 11:15:02 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLbSyR85QhpM9zNtazwFm-2Y+9rwigaPt-_m92WFWSHNXA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com>
Cc: Ali Juma <ajuma@chromium.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Matt Woodrow <matt@mozilla.com>, Cameron McCormack <cmccormack@mozilla.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com> wrote:

>
> The problem with that approach is that when some browser adds new-property
>> and extends will-animate syntax to support new-property, and an author
>> writes "will-animate: transform, new-property", other browsers get no
>> will-animate at all.
>>
>
> Can we simply require all identifiers (except all, inherit, initial,
> unset) to be parsed?
>

Yes, we proposed that. I'm talking about the problem with Ali's approach.

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 22:15:28 UTC

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