- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:05:49 +0100
- To: Shane Stephens <shans@google.com>
- Cc: Brian Birtles <birtles@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
This issue has been logged already. <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15841> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/0077.html> The options seem to be: 1. Even if the animation ends half-way through a cycle, apply the style from the final keyframe for fill. 2. Apply a fill style corresponding to the state of the animation when it ended, which may be half-way between keyframes. I agree that (2) seems less surprising. An alternative is to disallow fractional animation-interation-count. Simon On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:25 AM, Shane Stephens wrote: > What currently happens with a non-integer animation-iteration-count > and animation-fill-mode: both? > > According to the spec at least, an animation-fill-mode of forwards or > both applies the values in the most recently executing keyframe once > the animation has ended. Does that mean setting an > animation-iteration-count of 0.5 and animation-fill-mode of forwards > for an animation with only a from and a to keyframe will result in the > values specified in the from keyframe being applied after the > animation has ended? > > Regardless, I agree strongly with Tab and Brian that continuity is > more desirable - we want to provide abstractions that are minimally > surprising to web developers, and: > (1) abstractions that have suddenly discontinuous results when > specifying continuous values are more surprising than those which > don't > (2) abstractions that allow two different implementations to provide > completely different results from the same input values are more > surprising than those which don't > > Cheers, > -Shane > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Brian Birtles <birtles@gmail.com> wrote: >> (2012/02/06 18:56), Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> >>> I'm also okay with this, though if we're accepting that non-integer >>> iteration counts are useful, I think that counts between 0 and 1 are >>> fine. >> >> >> I've found with SVG Animation that non-integer iteration counts are pretty >> useful. For example, if you have motion on a loop path it's not uncommon to >> want to run the loop 1.5 times. repeatCount="1.5" is a lot simpler than >> using keyPoints, or end times etc. for that. >> >> (Also, a lot of other features in SVG such as repeatDur assume you can do >> fractions of intervals. I suspect CSS will also need this eventually.) >> >> I agree with Tab that if you allow non-integer iteration counts, you should >> allow values between 0 and 1. >> >
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 08:06:26 UTC