Dette websted vil have begrænset funktionalitet, mens vi gennemgår vedligeholdelse for at forbedre din oplevelse. Hvis en artikel ikke løser dit problem, og du vil stille et spørgsmål, har vi vores supportfællesskab, der venter på at hjælpe dig på @FirefoxSupport på Twitter og/r/firefox på Reddit.

Søg i Support

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Læs mere

Firefox is very slow with masking images and animations in general.

  • 1 svar
  • 1 har dette problem
  • 4 visninger
  • Seneste svar af user1929

more options

I am using animation on SVG elements (only paths) (Just by toggling the visibility property of paths very frequently with JavaScript). The SVG has a background image. Some of the paths that are displayed must have the background image on the stroke (to appear as if they are erasing paths). I use the masking capability of SVG to do this.

There are too many paths with or without background image on the stroke. This works well in Chrome. However, in FireFox, the animation process becomes very slow while displaying an erasing path (i.e a path with the background image on the stroke). Is there any other way to display an erasing path to which Firefox responds well.

I am using animation on SVG elements (only paths) (Just by toggling the visibility property of paths very frequently with JavaScript). The SVG has a background image. Some of the paths that are displayed must have the background image on the stroke (to appear as if they are erasing paths). I use the masking capability of SVG to do this. There are too many paths with or without background image on the stroke. This works well in Chrome. However, in FireFox, the animation process becomes very slow while displaying an erasing path (i.e a path with the background image on the stroke). Is there any other way to display an erasing path to which Firefox responds well.

Alle svar (1)

more options

If you have an example page that does this, could you open a bug report at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ ?