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

Re: Proposal: will-animate property

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 18:17:15 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLbQ_jbCf-NnL5z9vCKcO0w_=55wEV=tFrZV+uXiPkkvCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ali Juma <ajuma@chromium.org>
Cc: Nat Duca <nduca@chromium.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com>, Matt Woodrow <matt@mozilla.com>, Cameron McCormack <cmccormack@mozilla.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Ali Juma <ajuma@chromium.org> wrote:

> Even if we could automatically infer (from "will-animate: height" on the
> blue boxes) that the green boxes would be moving, we wouldn't be able to
> differentiate between the first box (whose content is fixed, and hence
> worth caching in a layer) and the second box (whose contents are not fixed,
> and hence wasteful to cache in a layer) without a hint from the author.
>

It seems to me that the best solution for this example is to specify
will-animate:volatile (actually I dislike that name, but whatever) on the
second green box to indicate that its contents change.

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 Saturday, 7 December 2013 05:17:42 UTC

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