Re: [csswg-drafts] [view-transitions-1] Is view-transition-name discretely animatable? (#9619)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[view-transitions-1] Is view-transition-name discretely animatable?`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: v-t-name is discretely animatable.`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;fantasai> khush: question was about view-transition-name, currently discretely animatable<br>
&lt;flackr> q+<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush: but doesn't make much sense to be animatable<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush: feeds into pseudo-element DOM<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush: I would be OK making not animatable instead<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack flackr<br>
&lt;fantasai> flackr: We've made this mistake on a few properties in the past, thought they shouldn't be animatable and then took compat risk to make not animatable later<br>
&lt;noamr> q+<br>
&lt;fantasai> flackr: if no strong technical reason to make them discretely animatable, would prefer to err on that side<br>
&lt;dbaron> s/not animatable later/animatable later/<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush: I don't have a strong opinion either way<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush: maybe we should wait for ntim<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack noamr<br>
&lt;astearns> +1 to discrete animation as a default to use unless we have a good reason not to<br>
&lt;fantasai> noamr: There is a reason to make things discretely animatable for things not animatable, because ppl use animation-delay in various strange ways<br>
&lt;fantasai> noamr: e.g. "in 10s this property would change"<br>
&lt;fantasai> noamr: could be useful for view-transitions as well<br>
&lt;khush> q?<br>
&lt;khush> q+<br>
&lt;fantasai> Rossen_: we could resolve to keep discretely animatable, and if Tim has reasons to argue opposite, he can bring it back<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ScribeNick: TabAtkins<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack fantasai<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: What does it mean to change VT-name halfway thru an animation?<br>
&lt;fantasai> noamr: for regular keyframe animations, at 50% view-transition-name changes<br>
&lt;fantasai> noamr: view-transition animation itself doesn't change it<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: So you're saying that vt-name isn't animated during a VT, but can be during a regular animation<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: IN which case the value fo the property gets captured at its current animated state if you trigger a VT during the animation<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> noamr: Yes. And that could be, like, an animation-delay just to timeout a change<br>
&lt;fantasai> noamr: people use that for timeouts sometimes<br>
&lt;Rossen_> ack khush<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> khush: It soundsl ike the reason we want it to be discrete animatable isn't a VT issue, just CSS in general.<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush: wanted to add was, keeping it discretely animatable has nothing to do with view transitions<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush: but general CSS<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush: We could add a note to [missed]<br>
&lt;flackr> https://www.w3.org/TR/web-animations/#not-animatable<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> khush: Coudl we add a note to Animation telling spec authors to make the property discrete unless there's a good reason?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> flackr: The first note there explains when props *should* be excluded from animation<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> Rossen_: So convo leads me to ask for resolution, to keep as discretely animatable. Objections?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: I think given it doesn't affect VT animation it's probabkly fine.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: We can go back to Tim and check with him<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> Rossen_: Right, there's agreement on the call and if Tim feels strongly we can bring it back up<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> RESOLVED: v-t-name is discretely animatable.<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9619#issuecomment-1823193469 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2023 17:26:36 UTC