Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Code Quality: Improve prefix, better scope, for animations #11752
This PR maybe fixes #11668. At least, this is the intention. It does two things:
This PR has been tested for all the animations I could find that were using the ones defined. But please give me a sanity check.
By the way I noticed the following two animations do not appear to be used:
Should we remove those? Or can anyone recall where they were intended to be used?
Another question, right now these animations are prefixed
Finally — what is the risk associated with changing these animation names? Do we have any way to know if plugin developers might have used these?
Looking very good, also agree with all of @youknowriad's comments, removing a lot of these would make everything smaller :)
Mostly happy to see that if you work through his comments I think we're only left with 3
Good feedback, will address all points in a bit.
I tested reloading that specific CSS file in a separate tab to verify this worked, and yes indeed moving the keyframe rules from the mixins file removes them from the block-library/style.css file.
One note for perhaps a separate ticket —