W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2012

Re: [css3-transitions] Transitions from display:none

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:07:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBL-xvkEPN=YPFZTfODWy2HaX4=wS2YPovw6sywimfY5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>
Cc: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Brian Birtles <birtles@gmail.com>, Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 7:26 PM, James Robinson <jamesr@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure about transitions, but Brian, Shane and I are working on an
>> animation specification that defines amongst other things how animation will
>> synchronize along with animation event handlers.
>> This should fix most of the problems that people are trying to fix with
>> 'display: none'. We're also trying to address the issue that the "small
>> amount of time" introduces.
> Does this (or a draft form) exist anywhere that we can look at?  Can you
> describe how it would deal with the test cases posted on this thread so far
> (see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jan/0582.html and
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jan/0816.html for some
> examples)?

Rik says the doc isn't ready for review yet, but I can at least
outline the approach.  It's basically "work around the issue".  ^_^

The folks mentioned above are working on a more general animations
model that encompasses what CSS can do, and most of what SVG can do.
It will have a JS API, allowing you to create an Animation object in
JS and kick it off manually on an element.  This avoids having to
worry about CSS or flushing the pipeline at all.

This doesn't solve the problem here, but it does relax the constraints
on the solution.  Feel free to design something simple and easy,
rather than trying to be "useful", because the JS API will be what you
should *actually* use for this kind of situation.

Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2012 20:08:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:14 UTC