- From: Khushal Sagar via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2023 15:37:37 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> What are the other potential qualifiers?
Same vs cross-doc was the only other one I had, but I can see that being specified in JS instead of CSS. Can't think of anything else but it's good to ensure its possible to add more going forward.
> I think this would expand to `(<<route>> and <<default-nav-types>>) or (<<navtype>> and same-origin)`
Hmmm, that took me by surprise. Reading the author declaration, that's not what I would've expected. FWIW, @vmpstr pointed out that this use-case can be achieved with 2 blocks like:
```css
@view-tranition <<route>> and all-nav-types { ... }
@view-tranition all-routes and <<navtype>> { ... }
```
So whichever expansion we take, we won't be limiting authors. We can decide based on what authors would intuitively expect.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by khushalsagar
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8048#issuecomment-1743251144 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 2 October 2023 15:37:39 UTC