- From: Jake Archibald via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 13:08:53 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I strongly feel the current direction is a mistake. `auto` meaning "use the value of the ID attribute if it's there, otherwise generate an internal value from the node instance" is super unintuitive. It's clearly two very different features smashed into one value. > The `auto` behavior should also do something sensible for cross-document view transitions I understand where this is coming from, but I don't think 'some completely different behaviour' is at all sensible. The behaviour is only the same between same & cross-document transitions if every element has an `id`, in which case you'd be well served by a feature that allows you to assign the `view-transition-name` from an attribute. If every element doesn't have an `id`, then the behaviour if you change from same to cross-document transitions is going to seem very weird. Given this, having two features: - One that takes the `view-transition-name` from an attribute. - One that generates a `view-transition-name` for the (pseudo-)element. …seems much more sensible and easier to understand. The first feature will behave consistently between same & cross-document transitions. The second won't work cross-document, but it's easy to understand why - the nodes are different. With this `auto` proposal, the reliability of the first feature is mixed in with the unreliability of the second. But given how different these features are, as I developer I want to pick between them. I don't want the UA picking for me. I don't want removing an `id` attribute to come with such a drastic and difficult-to-debug change of behaviour. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jakearchibald Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10995#issuecomment-2449805338 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2024 13:08:54 UTC