- From: Rune Lillesveen via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2023 10:26:28 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Just want to drop a few things: I think me and a lot of other developers would for sure want to use this for styling the initial state of pseudo-elements, and if it in itself would look like one, having something like `::before::initial` would be rather weird. Also, I really-really don't want us to mix the pseudo-classes and pseudo-elements. Could you elaborate on that? Why would that be weird? > In terms of developer experience and intuitiveness, @kizu's proposal is a lot better than a pseudo-class/element. I think the names could be bikeshed, but this is closer to my mental model of how I see this issue. > > > I guess, this could come too close to mixins though — I immediately though of using an infinite transition to always apply that initial state, and how it could interplay with CSS variables etc etc :) So maybe just @initial-state selector {} or @initial-state { selector {} } could be better in that it won't deal with the dynamic custom properties. > > I think the pseudo-class/element would have the same issue though, since the whole point is for them to work with transitions. It's not clear to me where the @-rules end up in the cascade? Also, the eternal question about tree-scoped names/references? I think @initial-state {} as a conditional rule sounds more compelling from an impl and spec standpoint. -- GitHub Notification of comment by lilles Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8174#issuecomment-1451638943 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 2 March 2023 10:26:29 UTC