Brian: I'd like to revisit this decision for the following reasons:
* There are valid use cases for an 'empty' animation that fires events such as to simply to get the events and do appropriate actions (particularly when running off a global clock).
* If you later allow sequencing and such an animation is part of the sequence, you'd expect it to take time--why wouldn't it fire events too?
* It's useful to think of animations in two parts timing+animation. Events relate to timing. They should still fire regardless of whether there is an animation or not.
I (Brian) recently made Web Animations support having a 'null' animation function for these reasons. If CSS differs in this area it will confuse authors and complicate the mapping (since at the point where you remove a keyframe you'll also have to somehow disable or remove the corresponding Animation object(s)).
On further thought, this doesn't effect us too much since the CSS bindings would simply not generate an Animation when there are no keyframes
> Brian might get back to CSS WG about this
- RESOLVED: When an element changes from display:none to display: non-none, animations start immediately.