W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > June 2018

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-contain] `contain` may not want to be animatable.

From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 08:04:21 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-394619222-1528185860-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
I continue to be confused. Some specs use `Animatable` as an entry in the propdef table. Some  use `Animation type`. I had been under the impression that `Animatable: no` was the old way of phrasing `Animation Type: discrete`.

[Issue 1 in the transition spec](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-transitions/#issue-animatable-name) supports this:

> <a class="self-link" href="#issue-animatable-name"></a> It no longer makes sense for this line to be called "Animatable".  It should probably be renamed to "Interpolation", and the "no" value renamed to "discrete" or "in steps". See mailing list thread: <a href="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015May/0256.html">message 1</a>, <a href="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015May/0257.html">message 2</a> 



-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2737#issuecomment-394619222 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2018 08:04:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 5 June 2018 08:04:31 UTC