- From: Yehonatan Daniv via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 17:33:50 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I tend to agree with @fantasai on both perspectives. If we do restrict it we lose the ability described above. The only case I can think of is perhaps if author expected to get an `inactive` timeline for a container inside the shadow but `nearest` continued to look up in the host. For `ScrollTimeline` that can be mitigated with a named timeline. `ViewTimeline`s, however, always look for nearest scroll ancestor: > View progress timelines are segments of a scroll progress timeline that are scoped to the scroll positions in which any part of the associated element’s [principal box](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display-4/#principal-box) intersects its nearest ancestor scrollport IMO it should come down to whether we want to allow the author a way of scoping this case. -- GitHub Notification of comment by ydaniv Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8192#issuecomment-1402329721 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2023 17:33:52 UTC