- From: Jeremie Patonnier <jeremie.patonnier@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 11:11:55 +0100
- To: Mark at Argent Cove <argentcove@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAEi838=1a6EN64NbMuE6XdTbXzFuHjsMXxVZCntnXFV8eve2Qw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi :) 2014-12-05 23:14 GMT+01:00 Mark at Argent Cove <argentcove@gmail.com>: > As an old-school actionscript animator this is really exciting to me! > This is great work so far! I see at least one missing piece that I thought > I'd share. > > I've only been playing for 15 minutes or so but right away I wonder why > all the most common easings <http://easings.net/> are missing? > The current set of built-in easing function are only those currently existing on the CSS Animation specification. The idea is to have version 1 on that specification matching what already exist in browsers. > I suppose I could manually copy the values into a cubic-bezier function > but that doesn't handle bounce or functions with overshoot like elastic and > back animations. These are critical to getting a real-world feel to the > motion. Am I just missing something? Is this doable with the current > spec/polyfill? > Not yet :-/ ISSUE 7 on the spec propose to improve the cubic-bezier easing function definition to allow an arbitrary number of point, which allows to create any useful easing function (I'm all for this extension). Such extended cubic-bezier function will allow to handle any type of functions, including elastic and bounce. > I know this is a spec, not a high-level API but why not include the things > that will make it easy for developers to adopt? > +1 on this as it is a well known matter as you point it out. Best, -- Jeremie ............................. Web : http://jeremie.patonnier.net Twitter : @JeremiePat <http://twitter.com/JeremiePat>
Received on Monday, 8 December 2014 10:13:02 UTC