Re: Updated versions of Apple's transforms/animations/transitions proposals

David Hyatt wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2008, at 7:49 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>> The issue at the end of section 2.5 is important. A useful experiment 
>> for evaluating animation proposals is to try to implement the OS X 
>> dock's behaviours, and that issue comes up immediately --- I gave up 
>> on SMIL when I couldn't figure out how to handle that :-).
> A dock implemented using CSS animations:
> dave
> (

Here is another implementation of the fisheye:

It is implemented as a behavior (system of event handling functions)
I strongly believe that things like these are better describable in 
terms events/behaviors. E.g. which event trigger transition and which 
one stops/cancels it?

In my implementation of the fisheye the behavior changes
value of attribute @magnified so CSS is able to better style transition 
steps, for example rightmost table on the screenshot above has following 

       font-size:11px; // bigger

       font-size:13px; // something readable
behavior in my case is a pure behavioral thing - it is responsible for
setting attributes and dimensions of the elements so CSS can do what it
was designed for - styling states of the elements.

I think that it is really makes sense to move things like this into
BECSS document and define there standard set of behaviors.
Thus behavior:fisheye(); there will have a definition of list of events 
and will define DOM attributes/states that the behavior will change 
dynamically. So authors will be able to style states according to their 

Andrew Fedoniouk.

Received on Saturday, 12 April 2008 23:12:34 UTC