- From: Paul Irish <paulirish@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:47:01 -0700
- To: Jeremie Patonnier <jeremie.patonnier@gmail.com>
- Cc: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, Douglas Stockwell <dstockwell@google.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, "bbirtles@mozilla.com" <bbirtles@mozilla.com>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <CAK-PPf3ZLhOhWbBOcc=BzWOeWj5fni06_g_QxDxJcZfFCKhNWQ@mail.gmail.com>
I, too, expected much higher use while crafting CSS transitions in ms, but I did a Github codesearch and was surprised that sec dominates ms for transitions: 300ms<https://github.com/search?q=transition%3A+300ms&type=Code&ref=searchresults> : 95k results ..3s<https://github.com/search?q=transition%3A+.3s&type=Code&ref=searchresults> : 666k results 500ms<https://github.com/search?q=transition%3A+500ms&type=Code&ref=searchresults> : 78k results ..5s<https://github.com/search?q=transition%3A+.5s&type=Code&ref=searchresults> : 281k results (GH Codesearch doesn't handle duplicates well, though, so these numbers aren't perfect.) However, as a counter example, I polled [1] (without bias, I hope!) to ask what people expected these durations to mean: > elem.animate({ opacity: '0' }, 100); > elem.animate({ opacity: '0' }, 1); The results: ~95% of people read these as millisecond durations. [1] https://plus.google.com/+PaulIrish/posts/QchucJRH7BX On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Jeremie Patonnier < jeremie.patonnier@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi :) > > > 2014-04-17 0:30 GMT+02:00 Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>: > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Domenic Denicola < >> domenic@domenicdenicola.com> wrote: >> >>> Regardless of spec examples, all of the real-world CSS transition and >>> animation code I've seen uses the ms unit, not the s one. I don't think CSS >>> provides any guidance here. >>> >> >> The first three sites I found transitions on use seconds: >> google.com uses 0.1s, 0.5s (not 100ms, 500ms). >> twitter.com uses 0.3s (not 300ms) >> www.smh.com.au uses 0.4s, 0.1s (not 400ms, 100ms) >> > > This is statistically inaccurate. There are millions of web sites out > there. How those three could be representative of all the rest? > > >> Literally the first 3 transitions tutorials I found use seconds: >> >> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/CSS/Using_CSS_transitions >> http://css3.bradshawenterprises.com/transitions/ >> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/tutorials/css_transitions >> > > Which does not presume of what users are truly doing. CSS support both > second and millisecond. If both are supported, it's because both are used. > > >> Do you have counter-examples? >> > > Unfortunately, no time now to provide you a list, but basically, all the > web sites my company is working on (we prefer using milliseconds... but I > do not assume our behavior is the general one) > > It would be great if you could provide more accurate statistics. > > best > -- > Jeremie > ............................. > Web : http://jeremie.patonnier.net > Twitter : @JeremiePat <http://twitter.com/JeremiePat> >
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2014 23:24:42 UTC