- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 21:03:11 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGN7qDDEw=JtgN1Wq4ztSJKZj28t4Ry5fSfDMW-cMib9zoMDVA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > > Why not have the same logic as the canvas gradient stops? > > quote: > > > > If multiple stops are added at the same offset on a gradient, they must > be > > placed in the order added, with the first one closest to the start of the > > gradient, and each subsequent one infinitesimally further along towards > the > > end point (in effect causing all but the first and last stop added at > each > > point to be ignored). > > > > > > So keyframes can then contain: > > > > from {...} > > > > 50% {...} > > 50% {...} > > to {...} > > > > and you'd animate from 0 to the first 50% and then from the second 50% to > > the end > > That is a change from the current semantics, where individual > keyframes with the same selector occur at the same time. > The spec says: To determine the set of keyframes, all of the values in the selectors are sorted in increasing order by time. If there are any duplicates, then the last keyframe specified inside the @keyframes rule will be used to provide the keyframe information for that time. [1] So, the current stated behavior is to throw the first one away. I didn't see that one earlier :-( How about: from {...} 50% {...}, {...} to {...} 1: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-animations/#keyframes
Received on Friday, 16 November 2012 05:03:38 UTC