Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-view-transition-2] Should non-default `view-transition-group` act like `contain`? (#10780)

> Based on the current spec wording, the view-transition-group for child would be root.

I thought child in this case would be under `::view-transition` (no parent group). Since `view-transition-group` for child would be `normal` which is spec'd as: "The used value is the element’s nearest containing group name." There is no containing group name in the example above?

> But there is some logic in having it be parent, as in, when an element becomes specifically nested, it also becomes nesting

Maybe we need a combo keyword, since in this situation you want parent to be `nearest` and `contain` at the same time? I don't know if there's precedence for this in CSS, defining which keywords can be combined with each other.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by khushalsagar
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10780#issuecomment-2311101232 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Monday, 26 August 2024 21:08:57 UTC