- From: Robert Flack via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 04:29:24 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I think the options are still fundamentally the same as in the OP. I think that having a CSS property that implies inertness would allow authors an easy way to ensure that the styles of content which is currently decorative / there for animations until activated by some means is nice. Strawman proposal: * Go with option 1, `interactivity: auto | inert` (name to be bikeshed) as an explicit property can handle other cases where content is intentionally inaccessible (e.g. behind onscreen content / transformed away and meant to be brought into view via some other mechanism). * Optionally, to try to ensure that that the property is understood that it makes content inaccessible to @scottaohara's comment https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10711#issuecomment-2310950905 we could have the inherited color be more translucent than the color inherited from, and/or imply hidden to hit tests, i.e. `pointer-events: none;` * To explain how this interacts with the `inert` property https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10711#issuecomment-2338876054, add a UA stylesheet: ```css [inert] { interactivity: inert; } ``` * Allow escaping inert, explain modal dialog inertness being unescapable using `!important` as: ```css :root:has(dialog:modal) { interactivity: inert !important; } dialog:modal { interactivity: auto !important; } ``` -- GitHub Notification of comment by flackr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10711#issuecomment-2378378364 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 27 September 2024 04:29:25 UTC