- From: Majid Valipour via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 14:33:11 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
majido has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [css-scroll-snap-1] Clarification of interaction between mandatory strictness and visibility requirement == I need clarification on how `mandatory` strictness interacts with visibility requirement for validity of snap position. ## Relevant spec text [`mandatory`](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-scroll-snap/#valdef-scroll-snap-type-mandatory): > If specified on a scroll container, the scroll container is required to be snapped to a snap position when there are no active scrolling operations. If a reachable snap position exists then the scroll container must snap at the termination of a scroll (if none exist then no snapping occurs). This is followed by a note which in particular explains this situation: > if authors assign mandatory snapping to non-adjacent siblings, content in between can become inaccessible in cases where it is longer than the screen. Later in the specification i.e., [Scoping Valid Snap Positions to Visible Boxes](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-scroll-snap/#snap-scope), limits valid snap positions from snap areas that at least some part of it is within the snapport. ## My Understanding Here is how I understand a generic algorithm that implements this will work: 1. Compute a set of valid snap position only including positions contributed from snap areas that are considered visible 2. If the above set is empty, we should not snap even with `mandatory` strictness 3. Otherwise, we should choose a snap position and snap. ## Issue If this is the right understanding, I think the none normative text is confusing and incorrect. In particular, larger than snapport content between two adjacent snap points does not become inaccessible even when with `mandatory` strictness. This is because if user scroll ends in that area, those snap positions are outside snapports and thus not valid, therefore we do not snap. Perhaps I am missing something. Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2526 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2018 14:33:18 UTC