- From: Noam Rosenthal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 22:40:36 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Not speccing `match-element` would be unfortunate I think, as it has legitimate use-cases. See [#8320 (comment)](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8320#issuecomment-2023077559) for a good example of where it would be useful. > > _(Originally, I had envisioned that the keyword `auto` would afford that behavior, but we settled at `match-element` – something I made peace with)_ To be clear, I'm happy with spec'ing and shipping `match-element`, but I'm not sure about supporting `attr(id, match-element)` because it would mean `match-element` generates an actual observable name, or alternatively that `attr` would have a special behavior as a `view-transition-name` value. -- GitHub Notification of comment by noamr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10995#issuecomment-2489680948 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2024 22:40:37 UTC