- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 15:19:20 -0800
- To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, Kevin Babbitt <kbabbitt@microsoft.com>
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote: > On Feb 4, 2013, at 9:47 AM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: >> So I think we should require matched lengths for the properties >> whose lengths matter: in other words, we should still require >> matched lengths for background-image. I have no idea what it would >> mean to do otherwise. > > One option would be to cross-fade() from some kind of transparent image. cross-fade() addresses this case *explicitly*, actually - if you simply don't give a second image at all, it'll fade to/from transparent. <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css4-images/#cross-fade-function> > For shadow transitions (box-shadow, text-shadow), WebKit does > allow transitions between lists of different lengths, synthesizing > the missing shadows (using shadows with zero radius and spread, > matching "inset" with the corresponding shadow, and choosing a sensible > color (possibly "transparent"). Note that, while this *is* specified in Transitions, it's missing the "inset" clause. As written, transitions will fail when going from an inset shadow to "none". I think, as a general rule, that if we can define a reasonable "null" value for an entry in the list, we should allow animation between lists of differing lengths. We can do so for shadows and anything with images. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 4 February 2013 23:20:08 UTC