- From: Noam Rosenthal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 07:59:41 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> > I'm thinking that in most cases nesting to root would be somewhat unexpected and redundant, because the root element clips the ::view-transition element anyway, so it's a bit of a double-clip. > > I didn't follow this. `::view-transition-group(root)` is a child of `::view-transition`. > > [container transform](https://m2.material.io/design/motion/the-motion-system.html#container-transform) is a good example of where this would be helpful. It's an element -> root transition. If you want all children of the root to be clipped by it, you'd want to place them underneath the `::view-transition-group(root)` pseudo. Yea I guess it makes sense from the point of view of the old element. From the new element point of view, let's say the document element has a `clip-path`. That `clip-path` would clip the `::view-transition-group(foo)` whether it's nested or not, because `::view-transition-group(foo)` would be a descendant of `:root` regardless of it being a descendant of `::view-transition-group(root)` -- GitHub Notification of comment by noamr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10632#issuecomment-2257717276 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2024 07:59:42 UTC