Re: Are CSS animations a done deal?

2010-03-30 20:38, Robert O'Callahan skrev:
> The expectation that disabling script disables animations doesn't hold
> today: disabling script doesn't disable plugins, or animated images, or
> <video>, or SVG animation. Nor should it disable CSS animations.

That might be true. Since neither of us have done any usability studies 
on this we do not know, however.

User expectations might change in the future. I still think its is 
plausible, though, that many users expect animation and scripted effects 
to be related.

>We have
> separate control in Gecko for disabling animated images and that could
> be extended to disable CSS animations.
>

Which might solve one problem, agreed.

However:

It does not solve the other problems I have mentioned, which are about 
authoring.

- Animations triggered by anything but hover and focus, eg. click, load, 
submit, XHR readystates, key events, etc.
- Animations triggered by events on the non-animated elements, where CSS 
selectors are not enough to describe the relationship.
- Setting animation properties through a script, e.g. changing the rules 
in a key frame, or creating rules programmatically.

Neither does it address my concerns about having clean solutions.

- Today we use imperative scripting to manipulate style attributes, to 
get animation effects.
- Tomorrow we should use declarative scripting to achieve similar, but 
hardware accelerated, effects.

There might be some pure CSS-animations on the web of tomorrow, but 
there will also be a lot of combined CSS-animation/DOM-scripting, with 
the current proposal.

So can someone please answer this question: Why should setting and 
deleting classes on an element be the only way to do this combination? 
Why do you like to impose that limitation on the technology?


-- 
Lars Gunther
http://keryx.se/
http://twitter.com/itpastorn/
http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/

Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 13:56:23 UTC