- From: Noam Rosenthal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 13:17:54 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> > ^ yea, `view-transition-style` could be a good spot to express this. Would the syntax allow combining with both `cross-fade` and `morph`? Maybe the content is the same but the shape of the box changes? > > It probably should since you would want to be able to mark either type of transition as optimized. Maybe through a keyword like `static` or so, similar to the `safe` keyword for flex alignments. That'd make `static crossfade` and `static morph`, but I think, since `crossfade` is the default it might make sense to also allow `static` on its own, as a shorthand for `static crossfade`. > > Like so: `view-transition-style: crossfade` - crossfade transition `view-transition-style: morph` - morph transition `view-transition-style: static` - optimized crossfade transition `view-transition-style: static crossfade` - optimized crossfade transition `view-transition-style: static morph` - optimized morph transition Hmm this makes me think that perhaps this is indeed a separate feature, since you should be able to morph the borders and still not capture the contents. -- GitHub Notification of comment by noamr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9406#issuecomment-2291251930 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 15 August 2024 13:17:55 UTC