Done!
Animations can now be synchronous :D
I ran the test suite but I doubt that module is very effective. I'd
appreciate if you could all test fx-related code with the last
revision.
http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/3495 (sorry, created a new one).
--
Ariel Flesler
http://flesler.blogspot.com/
On
I'm not sure we want to animate just the height or just the opacity in
the show('speed') / hide('speed') methods. We already have methods for
animating height (slide...) and opacity (fade...). If someone has a
suggestion for changing what show and hide do that doesn't duplicate
what other m
The point here I was trying to make is that show/hide(time) should be
a sensible behaviour. Personally I don't think animating the width/
height is sensible, but I'm interested to hear arguments to the
contrary.
On 4 Oct, 14:59, Karl Swedberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure we want t
To my eye, animating the width/height of an element with content looks
weird as the inner content stays the same size. Perhaps there is a
case for it but I'm not sure what it is. Animating opacity makes more
sense visually.
I've created tickets for both of these discussions outlined in this
threa
You can't really animate just the height. This would cause layouts
where an item animates in against other floated elements to break.
It's a decent animation - it's not like it's hard to create other
animations, what's the major concern here?
--John
On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Jörn Zaeffer
Could you create a ticket for this? The discussion came up previously,
without really getting anywhere. The width/height animate should be
replaced, with whatever is more appropiate. I think Michael Geary
argued for a simple slide (animate height only).
Jörn
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 8:56 PM, weepy
While we are on the topic of animation - what is the thinking behind
for example the
$.fn.show(time) functionality where it linearly increases the w/h of
the element from 0 to the expected value ?
To my mind it makes more sense to fade in by animating the opacity, as
the current functionality te
Btw... a simplistic approach like .css(attrs) won't do for attributes like
scrollTop.
We need to use $.fx.step or something like that.
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Jörn Zaefferer <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 for 0 == sync operation
>
> I had a similar problem implementing the accordion ani
+1 for 0 == sync operation
I had a similar problem implementing the accordion animations. I
always had to handle 0/false completely different then other values.
About the making async-operation-sync: Its easy to imagine how this
would break code when applied the other way round. But this way?
Jö
+1 for sync animations on 0 speed.
I really needed this for scrollTo/localScroll. Where I want to reset
the scroll position to 0,0 before the hash on the address bar does its
job.
I had to resort to .attr() instead of just speed 0.
Still, probably for most cases a speed of 1 would do.
Cheers
--
Also I note that jQuery.fn.show/hide are already both synchronous and
asynchronous depending the the input speed
http://pastie.org/282002
On 30 Sep, 08:06, weepy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Can't you just use 1 instead of 0?
>
> I've tried that but it's jerky. - you tend to get 2 frames - I
> Can't you just use 1 instead of 0?
I've tried that but it's jerky. - you tend to get 2 frames - I think
anyting <10 is not useful
>By the same token - making 0ms turn an asynchronous call into synchronous one
>also seems odd.
Yes I can see how that _might_ cause problems - how about asynchro
I believe your referring to this:
http://accessgarage.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/motion-sickness-and-transition-effects/
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:58 PM, pete higgins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It is also in the best interest of accessibility to enable a way to
> disable all animations across t
The one advantage I can see is that it cleans up your code slightly by
removing the if case. This could be handy in a situation where the integer
is set based on logic in your code.
If your actually hard coding a 0, then it would be obvious to just use the
css() method.
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at
Hey Jonah,
Can't you just use 1 instead of 0?
--Karl
Karl Swedberg
www.englishrules.com
www.learningjquery.com
On Sep 29, 2008, at 4:28 PM, weepy wrote:
>
> OK - so the way I'm using this is in a Board Game framework (eg chess,
> cards etc).
> Either the elements should be inst
>
>While I've never run across this, having 0 be 500ms feels like it
>> violates the principle of least surprise to me.
>>
>
> By the same token - making 0ms turn an asynchronous call into synchronous
> one also seems odd.
>
Point taken. Ok, what changing animate() to always have a minimum del
> While I've never run across this, having 0 be 500ms feels like it violates
> the principle of least surprise to me.
>
By the same token - making 0ms turn an asynchronous call into synchronous
one also seems odd.
Are there any known situations where changing this in the core would break
> anythi
While I've never run across this, having 0 be 500ms feels like it violates
the principle of least surprise to me.
Are there any known situations where changing this in the core would break
anything?
--Erik
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 9:15 AM, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is the adva
Could you write up a ticket for this if there isn't one already? I'm sure we
can clean up the implementation of it but it makes sense to me that 0 would
be 0ms.
--
Brandon Aaron
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:34 AM, weepy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> It would be really useful if $.fn.animate
It is also in the best interest of accessibility to enable a way to
disable all animations across the board, so putting this somewhere in
core animation functions to recognize a 0 speed animation as synonym
for .css would help in those efforts, should they exist.
Regards -
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008
OK - so the way I'm using this is in a Board Game framework (eg chess,
cards etc).
Either the elements should be instantly moved (eg on page load) or
they should be
animated (when a move is received/made).
I found that controlling this by setting the speed to X for normal and
0 for instant
greatl
But if you know the speed you want is zero before hand, why not just use css
instead?
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 9:44 PM, weepy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, a speed of 0, to my mind, implies instantly (as it's really a
> duration) - whereas it is being treated as a speed of null, ie
> defaul
Well, a speed of 0, to my mind, implies instantly (as it's really a
duration) - whereas it is being treated as a speed of null, ie
default.
The separation of null and 0 provides more functionality for the same
interface.
Jonah ;...(
On 29 Sep, 17:15, "John Resig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wha
What is the advantage of having it occur automatically?
--John
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:34 AM, weepy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> It would be really useful if $.fn.animate understood speed of 0 as
> being instant (rather than null => default speed)
>
> I currently use the following t
24 matches
Mail list logo
