- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:49:00 -0700
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Mar 20, 2010, at 6:40 AM, Håkon Wium Lie wrote: > Also sprach Simon Fraser: > >> <http://smfr.org/misc/animation-transition.html> > > That's a cool demo. One transition (left to right movement) and one > animation (bumpy movements) are combined to create a bumpy > right-moving box. > > However, you could also express this with two animations: > > http://people.opera.com/howcome/2010/tests/animations.html > > I.e., you don't need transitions for this. Your example works, but you had to specify the final 'left' state (700px) in two places: the :hover style, and the final keyframe. This is why transitions are good: you don't have to tell the transition what the start and end states are, because those states are already described by your CSS rules. > Now, for the reverse movement (right to left), both examples have > issues. It seems hard to attach animations to "non-hover" events. This > is a problem worth fixing, I believe. I agree that in some cases it's hard to describe symmetrical behavior (for example with discrete timing functions). However, I believe that transitions work just fine for the kinds of state transitions you're talking about, and that animations are explicitly designed for a different purpose. Simon
Received on Saturday, 20 March 2010 15:49:46 UTC