W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2013

Re: Proposal: will-animate property

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 12:10:02 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLaThFMV3P9q6NGA2isboLi5cmYA+Tyh+CJC_TrhR+=s6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ali Juma <ajuma@chromium.org>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Benoit Girard <bgirard@mozilla.com>, Matt Woodrow <matt@mozilla.com>, Cameron McCormack <cmccormack@mozilla.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Ali Juma <ajuma@chromium.org> wrote:

> To see why it would helpful for some will-animate values other than "auto"
> to not create a stacking context, consider the following example:
> http://jsfiddle.net/6rUyf/
> There's a list of items and a pop-up menu attached to one of them (more
> generally, there might be pop-ups associated with each item). Say the
> author would like be able to animate the items' positions, and also wants
> the pop-up to move with its parent item and stay above the other items. In
> this case, transform animations cannot be used, since applying transforms
> to the items will turn them into stacking contexts, causing the pop-up to
> pop underneath other items. Instead, top/left animations need to be used.
> But there's still value in buffering/layerizing the items and the pop-up to
> avoid re-rasterizing. The translateZ hack cannot be used (for the same
> reason that transform animations cannot be), so the current hacky way to
> achieve this (that is, to layerize without creating a stacking context) in
> Blink is to use "-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden". For the same reasons
> that "will-animate: transform" is preferable to "translateZ(0)", using
> "will-animate: left" (or "will-animate: top") would be preferable to
> "-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden" (and the analogous hacks in other
> implementations), but for this to happen we'd need "will-animate: left" to
> not create a stacking context.

OK, we can make will-animate:foo induce a stacking context only if foo
does, but then I don't know how to fix the future-proofing problem. Maybe
it isn't a big problem and we don't need to fix it.

Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 23:10:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:37 UTC