- From: Alberto Lepe <dev@alepe.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:51:26 +0900
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:22 AM, Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se> wrote: > 2010-03-29 23:16, Robert O'Callahan skrev: >> >> My personal opinion is that CSS Animation makes sense for presentational >> animations, but I don't want to see CSS Animation used for animations >> that are essentially animated images (like most Flash ads). > > Mark my words. That will happen! > > To many "ninjas", too many "clever" people, too much incentive! > > > -- > Lars Gunther > http://keryx.se/ > http://twitter.com/itpastorn/ > http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/ > > Lars, I agree with you. Having CSS animations is pretty cool - Its very good to have other way to animate elements without using Javascript or Flash - but I think they should be declared elsewhere, not in the CSS as in "style". IMHO it could be better if they can be included and declared something like: <link href="anims.csa" rel="animation" type="text/csa" media="screen" /> I think having a different categorization will allow a better implementation for controlling/stopping animations in the browser. Just my opinion, don't take it too serious. With the current idea, I wonder what is suppose to happen with the CSS animations in media="print" ? does the browser would turn it off automatically?
Received on Tuesday, 30 March 2010 00:52:12 UTC