- From: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:29:50 +0000
- To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- CC: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "<www-style@w3.org>" <www-style@w3.org>
On Oct 18, 2014, at 8:29 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote: > On Oct 18, 2014, at 12:05 am, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote: >>> On Oct 16, 2014, at 2:47 PM, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com> wrote: >>>> We should resolve the issue raised by dbaron [1] (Bug 14805 [2]) >>>> >>>> If we have: >>>> >>>> @keyframes timings { >>>> 25% { animation-timing-function: linear; } >>>> 40% { animation-timing-function: ease-out; } >>>> } >>>> >>>> ..then when the animation moves forward we expect linear to apply between 25% and 40%. But if the animation is moving backward e.g. due to an animation-direction: alternate then we also want linear to apply between 40% and 25%. >>>> >>>> Objections? >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0744.html >>>> [2] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14805 >>> >>> >>> I don’t think that’s right. The reverse animation should be a mirror-image of the forward animation, so the reverse animation should be linear for the last 25% of its travel. >> >> Maybe you misread? The forward animation is not linear in its first >> 25%, it's whatever the 'animation' property sets as its timing >> function. The forward animation is linear between 25% and 40%, so the >> reverse animation should be linear between 40% and 25% (counting >> backwards). > > You’re right, I missed the missing 0% keyframe. Added this animation-timing-function: # When specified in a keyframe, 'animation-timing-function' defines the progression of the # animation between the keyframe and the next keyframe in sorted keyframe selector order, or # the end of the animation if no other keyframe is defined. The specified timing function will # apply over this interval independently of the animation's current direction. Makes sense?
Received on Monday, 20 October 2014 17:30:19 UTC