Re: Dropping angle-bracket syntax for animation

[trimming the cc list]

On 04/08/2011, at 8:03 AM, Vincent Hardy wrote:

>> I suppose if we get agreement on that, then we can see what the
>> difference in functionality between SVG and (extended) CSS Animations
>> is, which will help us determine which of the three broad directions
>> Brian outlined we should head towards.
> Since we have an action (ACTION-48 - Write up use-cases and priority list
> of features to be added to css animations [on Dean Jackson - due
> 2011-08-02]), I think that means we had agreement during the meeting on
> that direction.

That's my understanding too. I think we can start from the excellent wiki page that Brian authored. At least, that's what I planned to do. 

At the risk of reigniting the thread that had finally died down, I do not think we should drop the SMIL syntax from SVG (I believe I argued similarly months ago when it came up here). I do understand Microsoft's hesitation to implement a feature that people are not requesting. The people on this list unfortunately don't count as regular users, and CSS animations are already more widespread, so it makes sense to somewhat prioritize effort in that direction.


Received on Saturday, 6 August 2011 00:24:37 UTC