- From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 23:22:22 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
> As I don't see any strong use case for defining animation names using > variable (well, I see one but it's not so important), I think poisoning > animation properties is a good solution. If use cases appear later, it can > still be reverted in later revisions. Since I was asked to stop self-assessing the importance of the use cases I give, I take the opportunity to express the one I did talk about in this sentence but didn't explicit. The use case I had in mind for this was the following one: you have a bunch of items, and you want to apply an animation on them (for example when they become selected, aka when the 'selected' class is added). However, the animation to apply may depend on the OS or on the user preferences, and therefore you may want to be able to store the name of the animation to apply in a top-level custom property to reuse it in more than one place where it make sense to (and maybe override this custom property locally if the default animation doesn't make sense in a particular context and you want to force some animation there). Still, I think this is an edge usecase & that we still can dismiss it for level 1, and accomodate him more properly in level 2 if that seems necessary.
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 21:31:43 UTC