This is awesome!! I completely agree that the Google proposal is much too complicated for an initial take on solving transitions.
I agree with Anne that this should be doable by adding CSS rules to a normal stylesheet rather than using a special linking mechanism. If that sounds good to you, then it would probably be worth updating the examples in the proposal to reflect this (don't worry about suboptimal names for now). I do have a few questions, but generally this looks great! * Is it always the right decision to have the new page render on top of the old one? Are there situations when you'd want, for example, the old page to slide away and have the new one appear underneath? You could for example create the effect of turning page in a book if the old page folds forward with the new page appearing behind it. One problem though would be how the old and the new page would negotiate which should appears on top, and which should appear on bottom. * Is it worth making it possible to animate the viewport in/out rather than just style the various elements in the page? For example if you want the new page to slide in from the right you have to not just animate the body element. You also have to animate any position:absolute and position:fixed elements. Maybe this would be best solved as an orthogonal feature which allows applying CSS transformations to the viewport. * We probably should add some form of API which allows the loading page to indicate when it's ready to be rendered. I.e. when the browser should start triggering the animate-in/out animations. This "page is ready to be rendered" feature has come up in several other contexts but seems extra important here. * I think we should make sure that this proposal doesn't make the feature Google ask for impossible to add in the future. I don't think the current proposal does, but it might be worth explicitly saying that that can be added in the future, rather than to just say that it's impossible right now. All in all, this is super awesome. Please do push for it at the W3C! / Jonas On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Christopher Lord <[email protected]> wrote: > Seems it has, sorry about that - here's a new one: > http://chrislord.net/?p=273&preview=1&_ppp=d17048fbc3 > > I plan on publishing this (on my blog) today. The proposal and shim source > is also visible permanently in git: https://gitlab.com/Cwiiis/gaia-navigator > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 5:23 AM, Ting-Yu Chou <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Christopher Lord <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> down. I'm not a huge fan of all aspects of their proposal, so I've made >>> my own: http://chrislord.net/?p=273&preview=1&_ppp=0afe20d87f >>> >> >> Seems the link is outdated? >> >> > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
