- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 04:10:07 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
[Tab Atkins Jr.:] > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 01:58:33 +0100, Sylvain Galineau > > <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote: > >> I assume animation-iteration-count:0 means no animation occurs and no > >> animation events are thrown regardless of duration and delay. > >> > >> Does animation-fill-mode have any effect in this case? > > > > When I raised this back in > > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Oct/0107.html>, > > David argued that it would make sense to avoid a discontinuity at 0. > > With that reasoning, > > > > - start event and end event should dispatch at the end of the delay > > - fill mode 'backwards'/'both' should have an effect during the delay > > phase > > - fill mode 'forwards'/'both' should have an effect after the delay > > phase > > I agree with dbaron that this is the ideal behavior. > Why is it ideal?
Received on Friday, 3 February 2012 04:11:08 UTC