Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-lists] automatic start value of reversed list is affected by 'counter-increment: <counter> 0' nodes (#6738)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `automatic start value of reversed list is affected by 'counter-increment: <counter> 0' nodes`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Skip 0 increments when determining the starting value of a reverse counter`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: automatic start value of reversed list is affected by 'counter-increment: &lt;counter> 0' nodes<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6738<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: This is...set up is weird<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Some time ago we told html it was okay to style the disclousure triangle on a details using list item. That way they can use marker pseudo<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: The definition in html spec says it's a display list item. b/c it auto increments the counter it also says counter-incemenet list-item 0.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: This means a page with a whole lot of summeries they're incrementing an unnamed counter<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Came up here with a reversed item counter. Question was what value to start at and there was perf issue in FF with an element named summary and there was a hang<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: The question was how we could make this work better. Only reason summary interacts with list-item counter is anything with display: list-item must interact<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: The way algo was writter to calc the starting coutner value for reversed list counts the 0 increments.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Mats suggests we skip those b/c it would avoid weird performance and if you are ever explicitly 0 increment a counter you must set as 0 so if you do it you are probably indicating the is not something that should interact<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: He concludes best to have 0 counters not count. I suggest we adopt this. For purpose of list skip 0 incrememnt when calc starting increment<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: oriol has some comments this is a little weird but once Mats pointed out perf issue we thought it wasn't a big deal<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: So we're fine with the change. Unless anyone has an argument they should count we'll accept that<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Opinions?<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: If Mats and oriol agree I'm inclined to agree too<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Prop: Do what Mats says? Or summary?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Skip 0 increments when determining the starting value of a reverse counter<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Obj?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Skip 0 increments when determining the starting value of a reverse counter<br>
&lt;fantasai> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6781<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Pointing out, Mats pointed out it's weird we told HTML list it's okay to use display list-item here. Her would have prefered to use marker without making it a list-item. Separate issue linked to be able to do that.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: If you have interest in that, reference that issue<br>
&lt;dael> oriol: Another note, when disussing this I found other issues in the algo. I can file them as different issues since they're orthogonal.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Yes, please do that<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6738#issuecomment-960248921 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 3 November 2021 22:38:14 UTC