- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 22:28:13 -0500
- To: Estelle Weyl <estelle@weyl.org>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org CSS" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <20141231032813.GA5481@crum.dbaron.org>
On Tuesday 2014-12-30 18:43 -0800, Estelle Weyl wrote: > Question about transition-delay: > > in my testing of transition-delay: when a transtion does’t complete or goes in reverse order, such as when a transition occurs on a hover, and the user mouses out, the transtion delay happens in the reverse order. So it waits before going back to the non-hover state. > > It also happens when the transition has completed, > > Is that intentional? Should it be explicitly stated under ‘transition-delay’ section. So transitions don't really have a concept of "reverse order"; when a transition happens from a :hover state to a non-:hover state, it's just a transition like any other (in response to a style change like any other), and the delay happens at the beginning. That said, the spec has rules to make the transition shorter when a transition is interrupted halfway through and the new end-state is the same as the old start-state. (I'm not sure how interoperably implemented these rules are, but Gecko does implement them.) Some of this is explained in http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-transitions/#reversing and in the example (currently example 4) a little bit before that section. Do you think the spec should try to say more explicitly that transitions don't have a concept of running backwards? -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, 31 December 2014 03:28:40 UTC