-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 672
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[web-animations-1] Require a style flush at the end of commitStyles #11085
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
WPT will be added in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1917071 |
e24222b
to
5212614
Compare
Ah. In that case, maybe the example I wrote in this PR isn't so meaningful, since commitStyles won't trigger a transition for a separate and more specific reason. |
@andruud, I think @flackr was suggesting that with #6688 this PR wouldn't be needed. Is that right? |
@@ -4877,6 +4877,22 @@ The {{Animation}} interface {#the-animation-interface} | |||
calling this method <em>does</em> trigger a [=style change event=] | |||
(see [[#model-liveness]]). | |||
|
|||
Furthermore, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For this to work, do we not also have to require that both style flushes during commitStyles are part of the same style change event? Otherwise, transitions will be generated by the second flush?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not with the current setup. Either the animation is still applying in which case the changes to the inline style should be masked by the animation and no transition is generated, or the animation is not applied and commitStyles
does nothing. Furthermore, the Gecko implementation of this PR passes all existing tests. Do you have any content in mind where a transition would be generated?
After #5394 is addressed we'd have to make sure that the first flush uses the non-endpoint exclusive timing but I think otherwise it works. (There may be some cases of layering animations where the result differs, however, I'm not sure.)
I think if we merge #6688 then this PR will not be needed but we'd need to do something else to address #5394.
Fixes #11084.