W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > March 2002

RE: "to" animation question

From: Antoine Quint <antoine@graougraou.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 19:37:32 +0100
To: <cogit@ludicrum.org>, <www-svg@w3.org>, <www-smil@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000401c1ceab$f806f6e0$9ec1c6d4@latitude324>
Hi Patrick,

> At first blush, I believe that the observed behavior is 
> correct. When an
> animation restarts, it does not create a new instance in the animation
> sandwich. "to" animations are defined to use the underlying 
> value as the
> beginning point. When you restart the "200" animation, it 
> must first stop
> the first instance; this removes the effect of the first 
> instance from the
> animation sandwich. The underlying value reverts to 50, and so the new
> instance of the "200" animation effectively replays the last 
> animation as
> you described.

Well, that's a little annoying. Have you got any pointers as to how I
may solve this problem? I can see a workaround using the DOM to actually
check if my animation should be activated, but I would hope to see a
solution using straight SMIL Animation.

One thing I don't understand though is why it reverts to the preceeding
value in that particular case when it always uses the preceeding
animated value in other cases. For instance:

1) click on 50
2) click on 200
3) click on 100
4) click on 200

This sequence goes smoothly, it seems that at every new animation the
implementation checks for latest animated value (lastValue) and emulates
a <animate from="_lastValue_here_" to="200" ... />. Why in that case
does it fallback on the one before last animated value? I need a little
explanation as I just don't get it. Anyway, I really think the effects
are a little surprising compared to the SMIL code I've written, although
that's a simple user's opinion, I probably miss something. Thanks for
your help on that,

Antoine
Received on Monday, 18 March 2002 13:39:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:21 GMT