Just to clarify: I'm not planning on removing step: function(){}, I'm
just changing the argument that it's receiving from being an absolute
number (generally in pixels) to a decimal number (from 0 to 1). In 1.2
I want to make it so that you can animate non-numerical properties
(like colors) which will require this change.
To future proof your code, I'd probably just recommend checking the
version of jQuery - because, honestly, there's no way to tell the
difference otherwise. Something like:
if ( parseFloat(jQuery.fn.jquery) <= 1.1 ) {
// it's a pixel amount
} else {
// it's a decimal amount
}
--John
On 8/5/07, Dan G. Switzer, II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> John,
>
> >Everyone: I really discourage against making plugins rely on step:
> >right now - it's an undocumented function that was going to be removed
> >from jQuery. However, since people are using it now, that means that
> >its API will have to be adapted to work with the upcoming jQuery 1.2
> >animation changes.
> >
> >Namely, step will now be passed a decimal representing a number 0 to 1
> >(1 means that the animation is complete). So just a big word of
> >warning, I wouldn't adapt too many accordion plugins to use it yet,
> >since the change is imminent.
>
> What technique would you suggest fixing the bump in v1.2?
>
> Right now, you're using the step because it returns the current height of
> the item being hidden. This allows you to offset how much of the newly
> visible panel should be shown.
>
> Were you planning in v1.2 to have a property callback function that could be
> used in a similar manor?
>
> This does seem like a useful feature--but maybe it should be called "onstep"
> instead.
>
> I could see why you might want to adjust other elements based on the current
> animation status.
>
> How would you recommend fixing this code for 1.2+?
>
> I can easily "future proof" this plug-in now--that way there's no need to
> update when the next version of jQuery comes out.
>
> -Dan
>
>
