- From: vmpstr via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2023 22:08:03 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Yeah, there's a [non-normative note](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-view-transitions-1/#capture-the-old-state:~:text=We%20iterate%20in%20paint%20order) that says that we're ensuring the named elements map has the same order as the paint order. This implies that the new elements that don't exist in the old state are painted as if they had higher paint order (ie paint on top). This is intentional. I can't find the issue where we discussed this, so it may have been discussed in the PR as part of the initial draft, but here's a summary comment from Khushal: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8941#issuecomment-1591769395 Essentially, we have to pick _some_ order, and the one we have is as good as any, and not too complicated. -- GitHub Notification of comment by vmpstr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9672#issuecomment-1839566968 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 4 December 2023 22:08:05 UTC