- From: Perry Smith <pedzsan@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 09:00:34 -0500
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Apr 4, 2010, at 8:05 PM, Alex Mogilevsky wrote: > One fundamental difference between transitions and animations is the > definition of start and end state. Generally, it is like this: > > (known state A) --> animation --> (no end state) > (known state A) --> transition --> (known state B) "An animation does not affect the computed value before the application of the animation, before the animation delay has expired, and after the end of the animation." [1] So, after the animation, the state is very well known. It is the original state A On a slightly different topic but I think it might lead somewhere, I see this in the animation spec: "If a 0% or "from" keyframe is not specified, then the user agent constructs a 0% keyframe using the computed values of the properties being animated. If a 100% or "to" keyframe is not specified, then the user agent constructs a 100% keyframe using the computed values of the properties being animated." [2] There is an "issue" just after it asking about repeating animations. But, isn't the two uses of "computed value" a mistake? They should be "intrinsic value". And that would resolve the issue about repeating animations -- I think. [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-animations/#animations [2] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-animations/#keyframes Perry
Received on Monday, 5 April 2010 14:01:10 UTC