Re: transitions vs. animations

On Apr 7, 2010, at 6:37 AM, Brad Kemper wrote:

> 
> On Apr 7, 2010, at 12:05 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Apr 5, 2010, at 3:32 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> I'm not combining animations and transitions in general.  I'm
>>> separating them further!  I am, however, allowing keyframes in
>>> transitions, to address a use-case that we identified and that can't
>>> be done well with the current draft.
>> 
>> I like the idea of supporting keyframes for transitions in some form.
> 
> My favorite so far for that is to have that keyframe animation completely self contained within a 'play()' function (taking the same arguments as the value of the 'animation' shorthand), assigned to a 'transition-[something]' property (such as 'transition-triggered-animation'). It's clean and simple and easily understood, and consistent with the separate 'animation' property.

But that's not transition keyframes. That's simply trigger animation keyframes using a property change as the trigger. Transition keyframes would express the keyframes in terms of the property being animated. For instance, if I have a 'left' property of 0 and I set it to 200px, I might want it to go 75% of the way to the destination, then go back to 25% and then all the way. The keyframes would have to be expressed in terms of these percentages. As I said in a previous post, I don't think we should consider this for this release of the Transitions spec.

> 
>> [...] Also, and for the record, I think the concepts of transitions and animations should be kept separate.
> 
> I second that. They are distinct, and the attempts to combine them have just made them messier and more confused.

Here, here.

-----
~Chris
cmarrin@apple.com

Received on Wednesday, 7 April 2010 17:45:00 UTC