Re: [csswg-drafts] [web-animations-1,2] Iteration delay, animation-pause, effects group and effects sequence (#4459)

My infinite respect to the awesome work done around this and the other standards. However, I believe, that the stated questions should be answered, and the feature included. Only from a logical perspective, if there is a start delay, an end delay, there are iterations, there should be "in between iterations delay". And is it complex?... well I don't think that all of this is simple, its all complex by its nature. And using additional objects to simulate it will move the complexity to the use cases, instead to the specification. So its one more drop into the ocean:

- for the first one, there should be a separate fill property (iteration-fill = ...). Happily at least this will not trigger the need of an infinite memory, as it is with the fill mode of the effects, because the iteration-fill will not be having an effect out of the "active interval".
- the "alternate" animation direction is the time change, that is not related to the fill mode, but if such a relation has to be explicitly defined, then yes, the "in between iteration delay" will be available and in "alternate" direction, for a consistency, and it will be defined relative to the "normal" direction always.
- the "iteration count" could be defined as "the currently active iteration index" then there will be no need to clarify is the time between iterations part of the previous or the next iteration. By this definition it will be not explicitly defined to be part of any iteration, and the iteration count will be incremented before the next iteration starts (...well, its not really "incremented" per se, its calculated from the time).

So from all of the questions remains only the fill mode, that could be included.

For the groups, yes, such a feature is needed, but not for the purpose of simulating a more simple behavior. 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by verbessern
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4459#issuecomment-547305105 using your GitHub account

Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2019 08:14:18 UTC