Skip to content
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

[scroll-animations-1][css-animations-1] A non-animated "Is in viewport" #10582

Open
noamr opened this issue Jul 16, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

[scroll-animations-1][css-animations-1] A non-animated "Is in viewport" #10582

noamr opened this issue Jul 16, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels

Comments

@noamr
Copy link
Collaborator

noamr commented Jul 16, 2024

Following up on #8282:
Currently to set a style that behaves differently based on whether the element is in the viewport, one has to use scroll-driven animations. For example, to set a view-transition-name when the element is in the viewport:

@keyframes set-name-when-in-view {
  from { view-transition-name: actual-name }
  to { view-transition-name: actual-name }
}

.thing {
  animation-name: set-name-when-in-view;
  animation-timeline-name: view();
}

The above works! However it requires going through an animation mental model for something that's not actually animated.
Perhaps view-timeline (or CSS animations in general?) can provide a convenient way to use animation primitives on something that's not animating? e.g.

.thing:in-view-range(view()) {
   view-transition-name: actual-thing;
}
@ydaniv
Copy link
Contributor

ydaniv commented Jul 18, 2024

Using a layout dependant state in a selector is something that we tried to avoid so far, as to avoid endless loops.
This is also why we went with a value-based approach for animation-trigger.
However, perhaps we could consider this as a further extension for State Container Queries?

@noamr
Copy link
Collaborator Author

noamr commented Jul 18, 2024

Using a layout dependant state in a selector is something that we tried to avoid so far, as to avoid endless loops. This is also why we went with a value-based approach for animation-trigger. However, perhaps we could consider this as a further extension for State Container Queries?

Yea that might be a better approach. Though I think endless loops in particular (pseudo-class) selectors are not an essentially different problem from view-timeline endless loops (you animate transform based on view() which changes your view-timeline and so forth)

@ydaniv
Copy link
Contributor

ydaniv commented Jul 18, 2024

Specifically for that we ignore transforms, per #8298 (comment).
This is what makes view() so appealing for animations, you can reason about it and have complex animations at the same time 🎂

@noamr
Copy link
Collaborator Author

noamr commented Jul 18, 2024

Specifically for that we ignore transforms, per #8298 (comment). This is what makes view() so appealing for animations, you can reason about it and have complex animations at the same time 🎂

Can't you animate the view timeline size, or animate something else that makes it move into/out of the viewport?
All of this is dandy but it has to do with when view() is computed, not with whether it's an at-rule or a pseudo-class.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants