Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-view-transitions-1] Which skipping reason does "View transition page-visibility change steps" use? (#10101)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-view-transitions-1] Which skipping reason does "View transition page-visibility change steps" use?`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Use "InvalidStateError" when skipping the view transition due to document not visible`
* `RESOLVED: Fix algorithm error, always return transition object`
* `RESOLVED: Publish CRD of css-view-transitions-1`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;fantasai> s/Topic/Subtopic/<br>
&lt;fantasai> ntim: implementing recent resolution to skip transition when document is hidden<br>
&lt;fantasai> ntim: we didn't define the reason/exception to pass<br>
&lt;khush_> q+<br>
&lt;fantasai> ntim: also noticed that the algorithm to prepare the view transition returns nothing<br>
&lt;fantasai> ntim: in the case where it skips the transition<br>
&lt;fantasai> s/transition/transition because it's hidden/<br>
&lt;fantasai> ntim: seems it should return the transition<br>
&lt;astearns> ack khush_<br>
&lt;fantasai> ntim: seems like a bugfix issue?<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush_: I think that was a typo, that algorithm should return transition<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush_: wrt reasonable exception to use, the other spot we use "InvalidStateError" which seems like reasonable error code for invisibility<br>
&lt;vmpstr> +1<br>
&lt;fantasai> ntim: sgtm<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: anyone else?<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: Use "InvalidStateError" when skipping the view transition due to document not visible<br>
&lt;fantasai> vmpstr: If transition is skipped, algorithm steps should still return 'transition'<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush_: it's an error in the spec, should be returning that in al cases<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: Fix algorithm error, always return transition object<br>
&lt;astearns> ack fantasai<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: do we need to publish a new CR?<br>
&lt;fantasai> khush_: If there's other issues to batch up, can batch up. Otherwise ok to republish<br>
&lt;fantasai> ntim: I look at ED when I implement, so fine either way<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: It's a problem if the ED is more reliable than the /TR copy, so let's do a CRD.<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: proposed to update draft with all resolutions and update CRD of VT1<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: Publish CRD of css-view-transitions-1<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10101#issuecomment-2009993110 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2024 16:28:37 UTC