-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 49
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
[motion-1] Serialization of offset-rotate #340
Comments
So is |
Oh it does look like it looking at the spec. That's fine, but I wonder why having |
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftest because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftest because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftests because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212 bugzilla-url: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1429301 gecko-commit: ae71e496d5873033d9696c54fb8b36297abbf8d0 gecko-integration-branch: autoland gecko-reviewers: emilio
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftests because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212 --HG-- extra : moz-landing-system : lando
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftests because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftests because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212 bugzilla-url: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1429301 gecko-commit: ae71e496d5873033d9696c54fb8b36297abbf8d0 gecko-integration-branch: autoland gecko-reviewers: emilio
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftests because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftests because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212
The If we have animation from The spec answers these questions by normalizing all We have smooth animation, with |
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftests because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212
This includes style system and layout update. I add 3 extra reftests because the original tests use ray() function as the offset-path, but we don't support it. It'd be better to add tests using a different type of offset-path. The spec issue about the serialization: w3c/fxtf-drafts#340 Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D32212 bugzilla-url: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1429301 gecko-commit: ae71e496d5873033d9696c54fb8b36297abbf8d0 gecko-integration-branch: autoland gecko-reviewers: emilio
Closing as invalid, because the spec doesn't specify serialization at all, and so the general CSSOM rules apply - shortest serialization, in grammar order. As always, the "Computed Value" line says absolutely nothing about how to serialize the value; it describes the internal representation of the value, which is then used by serialization to produce a string that'll reproduce the same internal representation when re-parsed. However, the WPT tests are thus wrong and need to be updated. |
Per the spec definition [1] and its wpt [2], the serialization of the specified values seems like:
(template:
input
=>serialization of the specified value
)auto
=>auto
auto 0deg
=>auto 0deg
0rad reverse
=>reverse 0rad
0deg
=>0deg
However, based on the shortest serialization principle, it seems the expected results are:
auto
=>auto
auto 0deg
=>auto
0rad reverse
=>reverse
0deg
=>0deg
Just wonder is it possible to make the serialization simpler? Or is there any specific reason to keep the
0deg
angle in the serialization?This rule also applies to the computed value, I think.
(template:
input
=>specified value
=>computed value
)auto
=>auto
=>auto
auto 0deg
=>auto
=>auto
reverse 0deg
=>reverse
=>auto 180deg
Besides, for computed value, it seems we always convert
reverse xdeg
intoauto (180+x)deg
, so it could be easier to do interpolation because no need to do an additional conversion, I guess.[1] https://drafts.fxtf.org/motion-1/#offset-rotate-property
[2] https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/css/motion/parsing/offset-rotate-parsing-valid.html
cc @ericwilligers @emilio
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: