- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 14:55:59 -0700
- To: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>
- Cc: Brian Birtles <bbirtles@mozilla.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com> wrote: > I think that having an 'always on' animation is pretty useful. > > It might be enough just to have an 'always on from the start of the > document's timeline' animation, but an author could pretty easily end up > accidentally going outside that bound when manipulating currentTime and > playbackRate on a player. Having an animation guaranteed to be running no > matter what seems like a pretty basic primitive. > > If we accept the need for this primitive, then 'delay = -Infinity; > iterations = Infinity' seems like a pretty straightforward way to represent > it. A little bit of extra specification cost is worth it if the result is > intuitive to developers. That's reasonable. So you're okay with .currentIteration being permanently Infinity for such animations? ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2014 21:56:46 UTC