- From: Noam Rosenthal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2024 16:20:12 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Seems like a very incoherent model if `element.startViewTransition()` behaved differently than `document.startViewTransition()`. It's even more unpredictable than `document.startViewTransition()` behaving differently than `@view-transition` Nobody is suggesting any particular change in behavior; I think this is becoming a bit hypothetical. > `match-element` is the clearly the right behavior for `auto` in scoped-element transitions. Are we going to make `auto` behave differently there? `attr(id ident, match-element)` is useful in case someone tries to do scoped-element transitions while rebuilding the DOM. I don't think so; Just pointing out that branching `match-element` makes sense, but that I don't see examples of usefulness of trying to match by ID first. > > What makes these "multi-page" in the cross-document sense? Astro supports both cross-document and same-document mode. Right now auto name generation would not work with either the auto and match-element proposal without changing the DOM and adding IDs everywhere (neither astro examples use IDs in conjunction with view-transition-name)... > > I wanted to point out these types of use cases would exclusively use cross document view transitions in the future. We can't be sure of that. Sounds like this is a bit of an attempt to "favor" cross-document HTML-first apps over JS-based single-page apps. You know I appreciate that sentiment and I would very much like to find interesting solutions to this problem (if we see that `attr` doesn't cut it), but I think that match-by-ID is a bit too particular to be it. -- GitHub Notification of comment by noamr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10995#issuecomment-2460220229 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2024 16:20:13 UTC