- From: Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se>
- Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 22:38:51 +0200
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
2010-03-31 15:55, Lars Gunther skrev: > However: > > It does not solve the other problems I have mentioned, which are about > authoring. > > - Animations triggered by anything but hover and focus, eg. click, load, > submit, XHR readystates, key events, etc. > - Animations triggered by events on the non-animated elements, where CSS > selectors are not enough to describe the relationship. > - Setting animation properties through a script, e.g. changing the rules > in a key frame, or creating rules programmatically. > > Neither does it address my concerns about having clean solutions. > > - Today we use imperative scripting to manipulate style attributes, to > get animation effects. > - Tomorrow we should use declarative scripting to achieve similar, but > hardware accelerated, effects. > > There might be some pure CSS-animations on the web of tomorrow, but > there will also be a lot of combined CSS-animation/DOM-scripting, with > the current proposal. > > So can someone please answer this question: Why should setting and > deleting classes on an element be the only way to do this combination? > Why do you like to impose that limitation on the technology? As people return from easter/pesach/holiday of choice, I hope somebody will take the time to address my question. (And I've not even begun to talk about accessibility yet...) -- Lars Gunther http://keryx.se/ http://twitter.com/itpastorn/ http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/
Received on Sunday, 4 April 2010 20:39:20 UTC