- From: Miriam Suzanne via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2023 13:04:24 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
This is a good list of options, thanks for laying them out. A few I'd maybe remove: - I think both named containers and style containers (the first two options) are too broad to be useful, especially as authors start naming more style containers. - Restricting this to math functions makes the default use-cases more difficult, which isn't ideal. Like you say, inline containers probably have the best overlap with current use-cases, but not a great theoretical reasoning. That makes me hesitant to consider it a full solution. The new container type stands out as most attractive to me, since it allows explicit marking of containers, without needing the full inline-size containment. Then, if we think inline-size containers also match well enough, we could also say `inline-size` containers implicitly trigger the `container-type: text` (name TBD) behavior. Then setting `text` without `inline-size` would be available for a non-contained option. (That implicit addition to inline-size doesn't feel essential to me, but might provide nice ergonomics to match author expectation) -- GitHub Notification of comment by mirisuzanne Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9255#issuecomment-1712507117 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Saturday, 9 September 2023 13:04:26 UTC