change pathname prop to key about react-router-transition

[leonaves]

I don't think there's necessarily a problem with the word "pathname", it helps to tangibly tie it to react-router, this is made for "route" transitions after all, I think "key" is just further abstract.

[leonaves]

What about "route"? "Pathname" kind of implies the whole path, as well as it having the same name as the property that holds the whole path, where "route" isn't necessarily the entire path. That along with readme changes I think would really help clarify things.

[jacobangel]

How bad would it be to just have a v4 specific <SwitchTransition> component that handles mapping the active path to the animating route? Seems like in many of the cases, exposing the wiring would be unnecessary. Too closely bound?

aka:

<Route render={({location, history, match}) => (
    <SwitchTransition 
       location={location}        
       key={location.key}
       atEnter={{ opacity: 0 }}
       atLeave={{ opacity: 0 }}
       atActive={{ opacity: 1 }}
     >
         <Route exact path="/" component={Home} />
         <Route exact path="/about/" component={About}/>
     </SwitchTransition>    
 )} />

[jacobangel]

Derp, just saw the date on this.

[maisano]

this is already done, i just haven't finalized it and made new docs for it.

…

On Jun 8, 2017, at 11:08 PM, Jacob Angel ***@***.***> wrote: How bad would it be to just have a v4 specific <SwitchTransition> component? Too closely bound? aka: <Route render={({location, history, match}) => ( <SwitchTransition location={location} key={location.key} atEnter={{ opacity: 0 }} atLeave={{ opacity: 0 }} atActive={{ opacity: 1 }} > <Route exact path="/" component={Home} /> <Route exact path="/about/" component={About}/> </SwitchTransition> )} /> — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.