- From: Mason Freed via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2022 19:25:15 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Per the resolution, we'd like to add `:open`, but need to define it better. I spoke to @tabatkins, who came up with this definition: > The `:open` pseudo-class represents an element that has both "open" and "closed" states, and which is currently in the "open" state. Exactly what "open" and "closed" mean is host-language specific, but exemplified by elements such as HTML's `<details>`, `<select>`, and `<dialog>` elements, all of which can be toggled "open" to display more content (or any content at all, in the case of `<dialog>`). > > Note: Being "open" is a semantic state. An element not currently being displayed (for example, if it is in a `display: none` container) can still be "open" and will match `:open`. I love this definition, as I think it captures a concept of "openness" that lines up with what most developers think "open" means. I also think it makes it relatively straightforward for HTML to connect it to specific elements. What do folks think? Should we also talk about adding the corresponding `:closed` pseudo class? That would avoid the problem that `:not(:open)` can match anything, including things that don't open or close. -- GitHub Notification of comment by mfreed7 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7319#issuecomment-1242377579 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 9 September 2022 19:25:17 UTC