Sounds good, I'll give that a shot. Thanks again Aidan.

-Seth

On Tuesday, April 17, 2012 2:16:52 PM UTC-4, Aidan OK wrote:
>
> Dynamic positions work fine with transitions, how it works is you just say 
> (by setting the transition property) 'I want to animate any changes to 
> top,left,width,height' . You don't even need to specify the positions at 
> that time, but from that point on, any-time you set the 
> left/top/right/width, it will animate the changes automatically.
>
> They have some nice properties like automatically reversing a transition 
> if you set some new values while the element is still animating too.. I 
> guess it really comes down if you're prepared to have it not work in ie6-9, 
> and deal with the inevitable quirks that come up due to css3 still being a 
> work in progress :( 
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 6:49 PM, GWTter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Aidan,
>>
>> Thanks for the suggestion. I actually considered this initially, however 
>> the move positions are dynamic/I wouldn't know the positions ahead of time. 
>> Do you think it would be possible to do this by setting the element's 
>> transition attribute or would it have to be the animation attribute? Thanks 
>> again.
>>
>> -Seth
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, April 17, 2012 1:07:40 PM UTC-4, Aidan OK wrote:
>>>
>>> Depending on your needs, you could consider using css3 transitions (or 
>>> even css3 animations, though they are much less supported) to get smoother 
>>> animations. (they are generally hardware accelerated) 
>>> http://css3.**bradshawenterprises.com/<http://css3.bradshawenterprises.com/>
>>> Its not a very 'GWT way'  of course, as it doesn't support old browsers, 
>>> but it does degrade gracefully, the elements will just move with no 
>>> animation on these browsers. 
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:44 PM, GWTter <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>
>>>> I'm testing on FF. I thought it was probably just that I'm doing the 
>>>> impossible like you said too because the code I have for the animation is 
>>>> as concise as can be, the onUpdate() is just 2 lines of code which are 
>>>> just 
>>>> updating the top and left of the element. Maybe if I make the duration a 
>>>> function of the distance so that the achieved frame rate would stay below 
>>>> 60Hz it would work out nicely. But thanks again for the back info you 
>>>> supplied, very helpful, really appreciate it.
>>>>
>>>> -Seth
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, April 17, 2012 12:07:36 PM UTC-4, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 17, 2012 6:05:19 PM UTC+2, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 17, 2012 5:43:03 PM UTC+2, GWTter wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've written a move animation using the gwt way (extending animation 
>>>>>>> class etc.) and it works great but I've noticed that when that if I 
>>>>>>> keep 
>>>>>>> the duration the same say 1000ms the longer the move distance is the 
>>>>>>> choppier the animation seems (the animation is smoother the shorter the 
>>>>>>> move distance is). I figured that this is because of the frame rate. In 
>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>> doc the frame rate is stated to be "non-fixed". 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anyone know if it is possible to increase the frame rate on the 
>>>>>>> animation
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it's not possible.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and if not can anyone suggest or have an idea on how to make the 
>>>>>>> animation smoother?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which browser were you testing this in? In Firefox and Chrome it 
>>>>>> should use requestAnimationFrame whose role is to defer to the browser 
>>>>>> the 
>>>>>> choice of the frame rate so that it stays responsive 
>>>>>> See https://developer.mozilla.****org/en/DOM/window.**requestAnima**
>>>>>> tionFrame<https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/window.requestAnimationFrame>
>>>>>>  and http**://code.**google.com/p/google-**web-**
>>>>>> toolkit/source/browse/**trunk/**user/src/com/google/gwt/**animat**
>>>>>> ion/Animation.gwt.xml<http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/browse/trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/animation/Animation.gwt.xml>
>>>>>> (and http://code.google.com/p/****google-web-toolkit/source/**brow**
>>>>>> se/trunk/user/src/com/**google/**gwt/animation/client/**Animation**
>>>>>> SchedulerImplTimer.**java<http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/browse/trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/animation/client/AnimationSchedulerImplTimer.java>
>>>>>>  which 
>>>>>> uses a timer that tries to achieve 60Hz frame rate)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If your animation is not smooth, it's probably that it doesn't run at 
>>>>>> approx. 60Hz, which means that either your code in the animation or some 
>>>>>> other code runs too slowly to achieve that rate. Because timers and 
>>>>>> requestAnimationFrame (and basically everything in a browser) go through 
>>>>>> the event loop and task queues <http://www.whatwg.org/specs/**w**
>>>>>> eb-apps/current-work/**multipage**/webappapis.html#**event-loops<http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/webappapis.html#event-loops>>
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> it can be that something else than the animation is pushing too many 
>>>>>> tasks 
>>>>>> in the queue and/or that those task run slowly, delaying other tasks and 
>>>>>> therefore prevent reaching the 60Hz target rate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, of course, it can also be that you're trying to do the 
>>>>> impossible, and the only solution would be to run the animation for a 
>>>>> longer duration so that the moves between each frame (at the same frame 
>>>>> rate) are smaller. 
>>>>>
>>>>  -- 
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/**
>>>> msg/google-web-toolkit/-/**y3cJB_TZzlYJ<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/y3cJB_TZzlYJ>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@**
>>>> googlegroups.com <[email protected]>.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+**
>>>> [email protected]<google-web-toolkit%[email protected]>
>>>> .
>>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>>>> group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en>
>>>> **.
>>>>
>>>
>>>  -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Google Web Toolkit" group.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/TGBoX4dC0LAJ.
>>
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/cXV8oCS6WrMJ.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Reply via email to