Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-scroll-snap-2] scroll-start-target: auto doesn't match general meaning of auto (#11173)

> Wouldn't `scroll-origin-*` possibly be confusing, as we're not affecting the [scroll origin](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-overflow-3/#scroll-origin), but the initial scroll position of the container?

I also agree, but I felt since [scroll origin](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-overflow-3/#scroll-origin) is more of a spec detail rather than an API exposed to developers, it wouldn't be much of a concern. But maybe some future property might use "scroll-origin-*" in a way that aligns with [scroll origin](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-overflow-3/#scroll-origin) so it would be better to avoid that potential source of confusion if we can.

I've also thought of `initial-scroll-target` (it just sounds better than `scroll-initial-target` :) ) but I felt it might sound like it's specifying what the affected element should scroll to rather than that it should be scrolled to by its scroll container (though the same can be said of `scroll-start-target`) so I wondered if `scroll-container-target` might be a better name. It doesn't convey [initial scroll position](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-overflow-3/#initial-scroll-position) quite as directly but it might work well if we combine it with options that reflect \<scope> and \<timing> like I mention above. E.g.:
```
.target {
    scroll-container-target: local always;
}
```

To be clear I'm not proposing we adopt all these names right away, but that `scroll-container-target` is a name we can use now which would work well with other options we might think about in the future.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by DavMila
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11173#issuecomment-2501033361 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2024 14:56:16 UTC