Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Scroll-linked Animations (#330)

> We're excited to see this spec continue to improve. It looks like there's still quite a bit that still needs to be filled out, and that's OK at an early stage as long as you're aware that there are a bunch more pieces that need to be written. (For example, what happens if the `<time>` argument to `scroll()` is omitted?)

Yes. I think I should have included a bit more of an explainer of where we think the spec is 'at'. Our view is that the imperative (JavaScript) side of the spec is reasonably well developed, but the CSS side has lagged far, far behind and could feasibly be approached with a full rewrite. Very interested in any thoughts on the best way to approach the CSS part. (For example, the spec as it is written currently includes a way to select an element in CSS which is just not a thing as far as we know. It's possible the CSS side may have to be 'weaker' in only having implicit selection of the `scrollSource`.)

>  We note that the web animations spec has high coupling with this proposal... is there an intent to re-integrate into that spec in the future?

Having conferred with the other Web Animations authors, we see Scroll-linked Animations as a separate proposal, that depends on Web Animations (similar to css-animations-2 or css-transitions-2). We do think that one part of this spec, the _general_ concept of the CSS `animation-timeline` property, belongs somewhere like css-animations-2 instead and that Scroll-linked Animations should then define an extension to the `single-animation-timeline` grammar to allow specifying a ScrollTimeline.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/330#issuecomment-460808577