- From: Robert Flack via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 17:27:37 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> I think your proposal seems to make sense. :) Thanks for reviewing! > The one bit I might change is to maybe flip the order of 5 & 6. Yes, I debated the order here as well. I think that 5 makes sense to happen first but haven't worked through specific cases where they'd produce different answers yet. > (I'm not entirely sure about 5, I haven't thought through it thoroughly, but it seems to make sense.) If you have a large snap area, you want to prefer the inner item that's snapped to. This should play well with the algorithm we define for nested snap point selection in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9187 which tries to clearly snap to inner items. E.g. consider when you're in a valid snap position for inner and outer below: ``` ----------- | outer | | | | | | | | | | ------- | | | inner | | | | | | | | | | | ------- | | | | | | | ----------- ``` If inner is in a valid snap position then it is a more reasonable current target than outer. -- GitHub Notification of comment by flackr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9622#issuecomment-1830349286 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2023 17:27:38 UTC