On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Jeff Muizelaar <jmuizel...@mozilla.com> wrote: > The linked bug suggests that Chrome implements this but this email suggests > it doesn't. What's the truth?
There used to be a steps-middle timing function which is what the linked bug originally covered. Chrome implemented it and shipped it (but exposed it only to the Web Animations API, I believe). We implemented it in that bug, but before we shipped it the standards discussion progressed and revealed that steps-middle didn't really solve the problem authors were facing, and as a result we decided on creating a frames() timing function instead. I spoke with Chrome engineers in January this year and they wanted to remove steps-middle but were reluctant to do so without providing a replacement. That's why I went ahead and specced frames() (and dropped steps-middle at the same time). In Bugzilla we just morphed the steps-middle bug into the frames() bug, hence the confusion. On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Jeff Muizelaar <jmuizel...@mozilla.com> wrote: > The linked bug suggests that Chrome implements this but this email suggests > it doesn't. What's the truth? > > -Jeff > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Boris Chiou <bo...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> >> *Summary*: >> A frames timing function is a type of timing function that divides the >> input time into a specified number of intervals of equal length, each of >> which is associated with an output progress value of increasing value. The >> difference between a frames timing function and a step timing function is >> that a frames timing function returns the output progress value 0 and 1 >> for >> an equal portion of the input progress value in the range [0, 1]. This >> makes it suitable for using in animation loops where the animation should >> display the first and last frame of the animation for an equal amount of >> times as each other frame during each loop. >> >> *Bug*: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1248340 >> >> *Link to standard*: FPWD: >> https://www.w3.org/TR/css-timing-1/#frames-timing-functions >> >> *Platform coverage*: All platform. >> >> *Estimated or target release*: Not yet determined. >> >> *Preference behind which this will be implemented*: I'm not sure. I think >> we don't need it because it is just a variant of the step timing function, >> and so it is safe to turn it on. If there is any other concerns, I can add >> a preference for this. >> >> *DevTools bug*: Not sure. >> >> *Do other browser engines implement this?* No >> >> *Tests* - web-platform/tests/timing-functions/frames-timing-functions >> _______________________________________________ >> dev-platform mailing list >> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
