ProgressRing does not jump backward to a lower value when progress decreases

[MarissaMatt]

Describe the bug
When the ProgressRing needs to reduce the amount of progress made, the ring does not move backwards it only moves forwards.

Steps to reproduce the bug

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Set ProgressRing to a value of 60.
2. Set the value to 50.
3. ProgressRing completely fills in and animates forward to the value of 50.

Expected behavior
ProgressRing will jump back to the value of 50.

Version Info
WinUI 2.5

NuGet package version:
Microsoft.UI.Xaml v2.5.0-prerelease.201027002

[marcelwgn]

I think this is a duplicate of #3173, @MarissaMatt can you confirm?

[MarissaMatt]

You're correct! @ranjeshj could we assign someone to the issue that @chingucoding mentioned above? I'll close this one after the other bug is assigned. Good catch @chingucoding!

[StephenLPeters]

@chingucoding I saw you said you would like to look into the duplicate issue. Did you run into an issue with AVP that prevented the negative playback rate from working?

[marcelwgn]

@StephenLPeters The issue is that the animation does in fact not play in reverse. When setting the playback rate to -1, instead of animating to that value, the progressring immediately jumped to that value. It would probably require some digging into the animation to figure out why a negative playback rate does not work as expected.

Edit: Created a PR to fix the behavior as best as we/I can. Animating backwards doesn't work, it jumps to the value, however that is far better than the current behavior.

[ranjeshj]

@StephenLPeters The issue is that the animation does in fact not play in reverse. When setting the playback rate to -1, instead of animating to that value, the progressring immediately jumped to that value. It would probably require some digging into the animation to figure out why a negative playback rate does not work as expected.

Edit: Created a PR to fix the behavior as best as we/I can. Animating backwards doesn't work, it jumps to the value, however that is far better than the current behavior.

Jump when going backwards is what the spec calls for.

[marcelwgn]

Jump when going backwards is what the spec calls for.

Oh I did not know that. In that case, I updated the PR description to close both this and #3173, I am sorry about the confusion and delay caused.