- From: Brian Birtles via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 01:37:15 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Let's say we have the animation [{transform: 'scale(5)'}] at 50% progress ontop of an underlying value of rotate(90deg).
Sorry, does this mean that the element's un-animated computed style is `transform: rotate(90deg)`? In that case, shouldn't the result be `transform: rotate(90deg) scale(3)`?
In any case, I'm pretty sure you're right. And I think that's why initially the [neutral value for composition](https://drafts.csswg.org/web-animations-1/#neutral-value-for-composition) was something that other specs were going to have to define for each type.
I'm starting to wonder if the reason we went with this particular order was related to handling `iterationComposite` correctly. The closest mention I could find of that was the [meeting minutes from 12 Mar 2014, item 4](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2014JanMar/0099.html) but I'm not sure. Perhaps it was to avoid having to define the “neutral value for composition” in other specs?
--
GitHub Notification of comment by birtles
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2204#issuecomment-359302241 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 22 January 2018 01:37:19 UTC