W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > May 2013

Re: Is border-color animatable?

From: Julee Burdekin <jburdeki@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 11:07:12 -0700
To: Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com>, PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com>
CC: Julee <julee@adobe.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>, Greg Whitworth <gkwinspired@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CDB7CB38.771C9%jburdeki@adobe.com>
Thanks Mike & Phistuck. Turns out it does pass the test for animatability. So I've set the value accordingly. J


----------------------------
julee@adobe.com
@adobejulee

From: Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com<mailto:letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 6:23 AM
To: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com<mailto:phistuck@gmail.com>>
Cc: julee <julee@adobe.com<mailto:julee@adobe.com>>, "public-webplatform@w3.org<mailto:public-webplatform@w3.org>" <public-webplatform@w3.org<mailto:public-webplatform@w3.org>>, Greg Whitworth <gkwinspired@gmail.com<mailto:gkwinspired@gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: Is border-color animatable?

Sorry. Didn't realize longhands were being implemented, but it makes sense given their unique CSSOM names.

--Mike S



On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:52 AM, PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com<mailto:phistuck@gmail.com>> wrote:
I think every property should have its own page.
However, if you eventually decide that border-x-color will not have their own pages, border-x-color should at the very least redirect to border-color.


☆PhistucK


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com<mailto:letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com>> wrote:
The border-color property is definitely animatable despite whatever error suggests otherwise. By "individual values," do you mean the "longhand" properties targeting each side of the box?  IMO it would be a bad idea to have separate pages for border-left-color, border-top-color, etc. That they share the same behavior is implicit, so no need for anything but a yes/no for the animatable flag.  However, shorthand properties like "border" do require separate pages. Hope that's what you mean.

--Mike S


On Mon, May 13, 2013<tel:2013> at 9:11 PM, Julee <julee@adobe.com<mailto:julee@adobe.com>> wrote:
Hi, folks:

Our CSS properties template provides for a yes/no value: a checkbox if something is animatable.[1] border-color is not listed as animatable in the CSS transitions spec, but all of its values are.[2]

I'm thinking of keeping that value as "no", but then adding a note in usage.

I would put individual values, linked, within the field, but obviously that won't work with the type of toggle field that it is. I'm hesitant to create a bug against the field type. (But then, I'd also want to file a markup bug against the string field because linking doesn't work.)

What do you think?

Julee
[1] http://docs.webplatform.org/w/index.php?title=css/properties/border-color&action=formedit
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-transitions/#animatable-css
----------------------------
julee@adobe.com<mailto:julee@adobe.com>
@adobejulee
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 18:08:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:13:48 UTC