- From: Noam Rosenthal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 07:06:29 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> > I wouldn't call `header > *` or `nav > a` or even section:has(a:active) an uncommon use-case. > > > > Agreed. I was talking more specifically about cases where you don't have access to markup and only have access to CSS as being the uncommon use-case. I think a lot of devs use `header > *` or `nav > a` for convenience and not because they can't change the HTML. > > > > --- > > > > There are clearly a bunch of intricacies here, so I want to say that anything we discussed would be a huge improvement and overall acceptable. The repetition here is acceptable: > > > > ```css > > .box { > > view-transition-class: box; > > } > > ::view-transition-group(* of box) { > > ... > > } > > ``` > > > > ---- > > > > The problem at the moment is that > > - transition names need to be unique > > - So it usually makes sense to generate them (with `useId` in React for example) > > - This means `::view-transition-group` styles can't be defined statically > > > > The `view-transition-class` property would solve the problem. > It doesn't yet, but it lays the foundation for it. > > > ---- > > > > I think based on the discussion above, it is clear that `view-transition-class` property will always be needed for some use-cases, so the argument can be made that we should choose just one more flexible way to do things, rather than adding a bunch of APIs for convenience. I think the more simplified way you proposed can be a great feature for a CSS utility framework or preprocessor. Think of a scss mixin that automatically creates vt-classes based on ordinary id/class. -- GitHub Notification of comment by noamr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8319#issuecomment-1849441767 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 11 December 2023 07:06:31 UTC