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

Re: Proposal: will-animate property

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:06:01 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLYqj7YrdE6nPBj-MkNobT4fOuexsa=Ui1UQdRztA-zO=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com>
Cc: Ali Juma <ajuma@chromium.org>, Nat Duca <nduca@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>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com> wrote:

> Alright I'd like to reach an consensus on how to best handle stacking
> context issues since so far there doesn't seem to have one yet.
> Currently forcing a stack context for all usage of will-animate is better
> for forward compatibility. For example 'will-animate: new-prop' would have
> the same rendering for any browsers that supports it. It was said above
> that forcing a stacking context isn't necessary to optimize the content by
> layerizing under certain conditions. Not forcing a layer is handy for
> authors where one wouldn't be otherwise required.

Forcing a stacking context doesn't force a layer, at least not in Gecko and
not in other browsers either AFAIK.

Ali brought up an example where forcing a stacking context is undesirable.
There was some debate about it but it seemed plausible.

Personally I think I can live with the list of values for which
"will-change" induces a stacking context being fixed but extensible
(matching the list of properties whose non-initial values induce a stacking
context). There is a forward-compatibility issue but it's basically the
same issue as new-prop:value appearing in a style sheet, which is going to
happen at the same time.

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 Tuesday, 10 December 2013 00:06:30 UTC

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