- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 09:24:31 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > On 10/2/11 3:48 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Boris Zbarsky<bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: >>> display:none is an interesting question. My main concern is whether >>> animations should _start_ on display:none elements. Continuing them on >>> such >>> elements seems fine to me. >>> >>> Would authors expect an animation to start on a display:none element >>> before >>> it's shown? >> >> I expect to be able to animate an element to/from display:none, once >> Transitions is fixed to allow animating all properties. > > Then maybe we need a setup for binding animation names that does not involve > full selector matching and a full CSS cascade. Otherwise you're imposing > some significant costs on all display:none users to support an animations > corner case. I'm somewhat confused, probably due to lacking some crucial bit of knowledge. You still have to do full selector matching and cascading on display:none elements in order to tell when they shouldn't be display:none anymore, right? What optimizations surround this that make starting animations so hard? ~TJ
Received on Sunday, 2 October 2011 16:25:18 UTC