W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > August 2016

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-transitions] transitionstart definition does not match Edge behavior

From: Brian Birtles via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 02:55:16 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-241943771-1472007315-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
I'm pretty sure the Edge behavior predates the spec so it's not an 
implementation bug per-se. It's really just a question of what we want
 to spec. For the use case I mentioned above, I think we have two 
options:

1. Make `transitionstart` ignore delay and update Edge. 
2. Spec `transitionstart` (includes delay) and `transitionfire` (does 
not include delay).

Doing (1) depends on Edge being prepared to update. If someone from 
Edge were to say, "We have people using this in the wild, we can't 
possibly change that" then that would make the decision easier, but I 
suspect that's not the case.

Even so, (2) is still appealing since making `transitionstart` reflect
 the transition delay is consistent with `animationstart`. We'd need 
to bikeshed the new event name though, `transitionfire`? 
`transitiondispatch`? `transitioncreate`? `transition`?

Is anyone from Edge able to comment on (a) why `transitionstart` was 
added in the first place (were there other use cases where including 
the delay makes sense?), and (b) if changing this is feasible?

I think I'm starting to I lean towards just doing (2) anyway for 
consistency with animation events.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by birtles
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/416#issuecomment-241943771 
using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 24 August 2016 02:55:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 19 October 2021 01:30:22 UTC