- From: Kari Pihkala <kari.pihkala@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:31:56 +0300
- To: Brian Birtles <bbirtles@mozilla.com>
- Cc: Kristopher Giesing <kris.giesing@gmail.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
>> Out of curiosity, do we even need the notion of sequence numbers? Or can >> animations be regarded as belonging to a list or array structure that >> can be enumerated and manipulated with familiar push/pop/insert/append >> APIs? (Apologies if this has been discussed before.) > > I think sequence numbers shouldn't be exposed by the API. They're just a > product of how the model is described. I agree with Kris here. The use of global sequence numbers is a bit confusing. Do you think the order of the animations could be described as a script animation list? A bit like this: In order to establish the composition order of script created animations, those animations are placed into a script animation list. When an animation object is created by a script, it is added to the end of the list. The keyframe effects, A and B, are composited in the same order as their associated animations appear in the script animation list. If animation a is before animation b in the list, then keyframe effect A is before B. The compositeBefore()/After() functions move animA to be before/after animB in the script animation list. The getAnimations() function returns the Animation objects in the script animation list, retaining the order they appear in the list (and merges that list with the CSS animations/transitions). Also, if a script causes a CSS animation/transition to move away from idle state, then that animation is brought to the end of the script animation list. How would that sound like? I think this would make the distinction between script initiated animations and CSS animations/transitions more clear. Best Regards, Kari
Received on Friday, 17 July 2015 06:32:24 UTC