- From: Daniel Holbert via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 18:55:02 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
One bit of feedback from reading the spec: The concept of "skipped" is a bit fuzzy right now. The spec defines it in a *descriptive* way right now, as if it's a classification that some elements naturally fall into: > skipped: an element is **considered skipped if** its subtree is not painted or hit-tested. ... but then later it uses the term as if it's an classification that can be applied by the UA, which has prescriptive requirements (e.g. `subtree-visibility:hidden` is defined saying "The element is skipped."). These usages need to be harmonized, probably by rewriting the definition of "skipped" such that it's prescriptive rather than descriptive. e.g. perhaps rephrasing as "if an element is *skipped*, it must not be painted or hit-tested [...]" or similar. -- GitHub Notification of comment by dholbert Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4843#issuecomment-611131666 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 8 April 2020 18:55:06 UTC