- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 17:37:06 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-contain-2] Proposal: content-visibility: hidden-matchable`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <dael> Topic: [css-contain-2] Proposal: content-visibility: hidden-matchable<br> <dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5595<br> <dael> Rossen_: This issue can take a lot of time. Let's try to spend no more than 10 minutes on this.<br> <dael> jarhar: Hello everyone. Proposed content-visibility: hidden-matchable property. I added responses on GH to the questions from last time. Wanted to know if there are additional issues and if responses on GH suffice<br> <Rossen_> ack fantasai<br> <dael> fantasai: Once concern is if the control should be in css or in markup. Might be good to ask TAG about that.<br> <dael> fantasai: Details about this the main question is what operations can and can't trigger matching<br> <tantek> +1 to fantasai's concern, "matchability" feels like an expression of more semantically relevant content and thus may belong more in markup rather than in styling.<br> <dael> smfr: I think chris's last comment is a good summary of my discomfort. I think TAG feedback would be good. There are features in UAs that vary and this prop has impact on those features. TAG level discussion would be great<br> <fantasai> s/Details about this the main question is/Other than that, main question is defining details of/<br> <dael> Rossen_: I'm scrolling through open issues. I see the match event open from jarhar. Is there another active one with TAG?<br> <dael> jarhar: I believe I do have a TAG review open.<br> <Rossen_> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/511<br> <dael> jarhar: Issue #511 on TAG<br> <dael> Rossen_: I believe that's scheduled to discuss during TAG F2F in a couple weeks<br> <dael> chrishtr: and the concern from smfr has not been yet discussed in TAG correct?<br> <dael> jarhar: Not that I know of<br> <dael> Rossen_: We have this issue crosslinked to TAG review. As the review with TAG we'll have the CSS issue as well for more context<br> <tantek> agreed with the reader-mode and screenreader semantics concerns comments in the issue<br> <dael> Rossen_: What I'm hearing right now is a pause on this issue until we have TAG review<br> <dael> Rossen_: Then bring it back here<br> <dael> Rossen_: Also heard concerns from Sam. That's the summary. Is that fair?<br> <dael> chrishtr: smfr you said you have discomfort. I guess not swayed by our arguemnts. But if TAG doesn't think it's a big problem you're okay?<br> <dael> smfr: If TAG is okay I'm okay. For example I got pinged by devs about what are a11y for hidden-matchable. There is ambig around a11y and reader mode. Prefer to resolve but understand why it exists<br> <dael> chrishtr: It's potential for dev confusion?<br> <dael> smfr: Dev and user. They ctrl f in reader mode but spotlight doesn't find it and that's confusing<br> <dael> chrishtr: So we'll take it to TAG<br> <tantek> +1 smfr<br> <dael> chrishtr: Your comments, fantasai, are good to consider. We shoudl work that out once we have consensus on smfr's issue<br> <jensimmons> We definitely don't want to create new CSS where the a11y best-practice is confusing and unknown. There should be calrity.<br> <Rossen_> q?<br> <jensimmons> *clarity<br> <dael> Rossen_: Cool. With that let's move forward<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5595#issuecomment-759606330 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2021 17:37:08 UTC