Today I made some substantive edits to the transitions spec to fix the remaining substantive issue listed in the body of the spec, on defining canceling of transitions. In particular, I rewrote much of the section on starting of transitions at http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-transitions/#starting to define when transitions are canceled mid-run. This required introducing a new concept (the after-transition style) and making the after-change style depend on the after-transition style from the parent. I believe this concept is needed to properly cancel transitions running simultaneously on both ancestors and descendants. However, it means that transition starting is (again, I think) required to be interleaved with the process of doing style change computation over a tree, since the starting of transitions on a child depends on a style from the parent that in turn depends on which transitions on the parent were canceled. I also added a short section on completion of transitions: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-transitions/#complete I'd appreciate feedback on these changes. I also hope to provide some myself, as I plan to try implementing at least part of them (at least the after-transition style concept) shortly. I'd also appreciate more general review of the current state of the spec. Given that there's a publishing moratorium coming up (December 19 - January 5), I'd somewhat optimistically say that I'd like to move the spec to new-process CR in early January. I expect there are still errors, but I'm expecting mostly the sort of errors that require implementation feedback to discover. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂 Before I built a wall I'd ask to know What I was walling in or walling out, And to whom I was like to give offense. - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2014 00:04:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:46 UTC