- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:41:12 -0800
- To: jwl@worldmusic.de
- Cc: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>, Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>, www-style@w3.org
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Joergen W. Lang <joergen_lang@gmx.de> wrote: > Am 25.01.12 17:17, schrieb Tab Atkins Jr.: >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Lea Verou<leaverou@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> FWIW I think there shouldn't be a list at all. It's a maintenance >>> nightmare >>> to have to update the spec every time a new property is defined. As long >>> as >>> it defines how each value type is interpolated, their combination and >>> potential exceptions, I never got why an all inclusive list is needed. A >>> list of a few examples, sure, but a list that has to include every CSS >>> property?! >> >> In general, the list includes everything that was "mature" at the time >> Transitions was created. We now have an "Animatable" line in the >> propdef tables in our spec template, so all CSS3 specs should include >> their animation information as part of their property descriptions, >> and the list in Transitions can just deal with 2.1 properties. > > Does this mean all propdef tables for CSS3+ will eentually be updated to > carry this information? > > That would indeed be good news. Yup, that's exactly what I mean. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 27 January 2012 23:42:10 UTC