- From: Tim Nguyen via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 15:31:06 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> There are similar proposals on this thread like https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8319#issuecomment-1756046626, the reason we didn't go with them is because often you'd want to define classes and names separately.
My proposal lets you do this:
```
.fruit { view-transition-name: fruit / auto; }
```
or
```
.fruit { view-transition-names: fruit }
#banana { view-transition-identifier: banana }
#apple { view-transition-identifier: apple }
#orange { view-transition-identifier: orange }
```
That said I recognize it's not super clear what the difference between names / name is.
> The proposal in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8319#issuecomment-1815203316 is about giving actual class names to pseudos, so it doesn't feel like a "similar but not identical" mix of concepts. It's actual classes.
Types feel quite similar to the classes to me, though. If we can reduce these 3 concepts into 2 in some way, it would be beneficial for developers to learn less.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by nt1m
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8319#issuecomment-1828060661 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 27 November 2023 15:31:07 UTC