[csswg-drafts] [css-contain-3] How should style containment by default be handled in the syntax? (#7403)

SebastianZ has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-contain-3] How should style containment by default be handled in the syntax? ==
In #7066 it was resolved that all elements are style containers by default. Though the syntax for [`container-type`](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-contain-3/#container-type) doesn't reflect that fact.

There was already some discussion in #7066 around that. This issue is meant to focus on what to do in order to make it clear to authors that specifying a container type for an element doesn't overwrite style containment.

Here are some ideas that came up earlier:

1. Make the `style` keyword mandatory
   That means, if a user wants to specify another type of containment like size containment, they would have to write `container-type: size style;`.
2. Cover that with additive cascade
   @andruud and @mirisuzanne suggested to keep the keywords as they are and instead push additive cascade. That would mean to introduce some syntax that _adds_ another type of containment to the default style containment. Discussion around that is happening in #1594.
3. Introduce new keywords that include style containment
   Like for the `contain` property, there could be new keywords introduce that cover multiple types of containment including style containment.

Anything I've forgot that got mentioned before? Any new ideas?

Sebastian

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7403 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 22 June 2022 20:01:52 UTC