W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2010

Re: [css3-transitions] transitioning to/from auto value

From: Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 10:34:44 -0700
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, Perry Smith <pedzsan@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-id: <977DAC64-1590-4851-AB87-568BB64BB720@apple.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>

On Apr 28, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Brad Kemper wrote:

> On Apr 28, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>> On 4/28/10 11:07 AM, Brad Kemper wrote:
>>>> Is the idea that all change processing needs to complete before sampling the "auto" height the transition should run to?
>>> Wel, yeah.
>> That's not what your original mail said, though.
> I don't understand what I said that was contradictory.
>>>> The moment such a thing is implemented, people will start demanding that various corner cases "work correctly"
>>> That still sounds better than having a huge number of non-edge cases broken.
>> From a UA developer's point of view, no.  It's not.
> From the standpoint of reading complaints from authors about what the "correct" way for it to work should be? I'd think you'd get more from the non-edge cases not working "correctly". In the end, "correct" is what the spec says is correct, but the complaints will come from people that disagree that the "correct" is "reasonable".

If the rule is that properties that have the 'auto' value are not transitioned then there are no edge cases, and authors have to remember exactly one rule. They have to compute metrics in order to transition a length value. It's seems clear that it's preferable that 'auto' never works than to have complex and buggy rules about when it may or may not work.

Received on Wednesday, 28 April 2010 17:35:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:13:45 UTC