On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > No, because then the animation wouldn't be playing in reverse. It > would be an animation with the values swapped. While that's > potentially useful, it's not a "reversed animation". > Yes, it's not a truly reversed animation. But, shouldn't the question be what kind of reversal is more useful rather than sticking to the definition of the word "reversed". Whenever I've needed a reversed animation, what I really look for is the same animation but in the opposite direction, not an exact reversed, so I always end up using ease-in-out as the timing function because it plays the same forward and backwards. If I use any non-symmetric timing function, I get an undesired result. May be there should be a way to specify what kind of reversal is desired. > This should also be easy to do when we finally actually implement the > "frames()" function that was proposed and generally liked a while ago. > I've opened an issue <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/136> > about it. > Interesting, this frames function seems a much more intuitive way for a stepping transition between keyframes. It would makes things much easier.Received on Thursday, 26 May 2016 05:24:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:59 UTC