- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:56:49 +0100
- To: Brian Birtles <bbirtles@mozilla.com>
- Cc: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Brian Birtles <bbirtles@mozilla.com> wrote: > We don't currently distinguish between Animations and Transitions in Web > Animations. > > Action: Shane to discover why DB thinks this is important Several reasons. One, transitions are considered less disruptive than animations. When people set values in a user stylesheet, it seems okay to still run transitions by default (people can always shut them down with a user-level "transition: none !important;" rule) - they're still respecting the user's desire, just over a non-instantaneous interval - so it's okay for magic-transition rules to sit at a higher cascade level than user!important rules. On the other hand, animations are more disruptive by default. There is no connection between the animation and the user's own preferences - if they set "color: black !important;" in their user stylesheet, an animation can still make the text pulse red and yellow. Thus, having user preferences override magic-animation rules by default seems like a good idea. This means that magic-animation rules should either sit between author and author!important rules, or between author!important and user!important rules. It doesn't matter too much which of those two are chosen - FF happens to take the first one. Two, having the two sit at separate cascade levels (even if they're adjacent) seems good to help resolve questions of "what wins when an element has both a transition and an animation" in an understandable manner. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2012 10:57:35 UTC