- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:49:50 +0000
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
> > [L. David Baron:] > > > > In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Mar/0013.html > > we agreed to accept my proposal in > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html for > > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15838 : that is, we > > agreed that when transition-duration and transition-delay are both 0s > > that there should be no transition (and thus no events). > > > > However, we didn't agree whether that was the only case. I realized > > that there are a set of other cases where there probably shouldn't be > > a > > transition: in particular, when transition delay is as negative or > > more negative than transition duration is positive. In these cases > > the transition end event would have a firing time at or before the > > time the transition started, which suggests to me that maybe it > > shouldn't fire at all. > > > > Thus, I've written: > > # When the computed value of a property changes, implementations > > # must start transitions based on the relevant item (see the > > # definition of ‘transition-property’) in the computed value of > > # ‘transition-property’. Corresponding to this item there are > > # values of ‘transition-duration’ and ‘transition-delay’ (see the > > # rules on matching lists). Define the combined duration of the > > # transition as the sum of max(‘transition-duration’, ‘0s’) and > > # ‘transition-delay’. When the combined duration is greater than > > # ‘0s’, then a transition starts based on the values of > > # ‘transition-duration’, ‘transition-delay’, and > > # ‘transition-timing-function’; in other cases transitions do not > > # occur. > > > > Does this seem reasonable to others? > > > My apologies for catching this so late; I agree with the resolution and > had only one minor editorial question: is the "max(‘transition-duration’, > ‘0s’)" > expression needed in this prose given that transition-duration explicitly > maps negative <time> values to 0s? Or is this just an editorial reminder > to the reader? It looks like I also missed another email on this specific clamping [1]. This does not seem resolved in either spec; I've opened a bug against Animations to track this [2]. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Mar/0591.html [2] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16806
Received on Friday, 20 April 2012 00:50:24 UTC