- From: Noam Rosenthal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 08:28:40 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Not sure the spec change is worded quite right, if you have:
>
> ```
> <style>
> ::part(party) {
> view-transition-name: document-scoped;
> }
> </style>
> #shadow-root
> <style>
> div {
> width: 100px;
> height: 100px;
> view-transition-name: shadow-scoped !important;
> }
> </style>
> <div part="party"></div>
> ```
>
> I expect the effective view transition name of the `<div>` to be `shadow-scoped`, and `document-scoped` being ignored.
>
> Since `shadow-scoped` is scoped to the shadow root and `document-scoped` ignored, the `<div>` wouldn't participate in the view transition.
Hmm right, so the wording should be something along the line of the implementation, where we get the computed value for `view-transition-name` and check its associated context. Will revise and add a WPT for this (and for the other cases). Thanks!
--
GitHub Notification of comment by noamr
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/10528#issuecomment-2210434945 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 5 July 2024 08:28:41 UTC