Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-pseudo] ::checkmark proposal for radio & checkbox controls (#5914)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-pseudo] ::checkmark proposal for radio & checkbox controls`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Use ::checkmark for checkbox/radio`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: next is naming the checkmark pseudo<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: this is in the draft spec, but no reoslution yet<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: the ::checkmark is the part that represents the indicator in the radio or checkbox<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> TabAtkins: the check itself, or the dot on the radio<br>
&lt;emilio> q+<br>
&lt;astearns> ack emilio<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> TabAtkins: iirc there was discusison about using ::before for this, but we decided to use a specialized pseudo instead<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> emilio: i'm assuming the tree is well-defined,  a specialized pseudo seems fine<br>
&lt;astearns> ack fantasai<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: oh, this is also to indicate the selecto &lt;option><br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: need to clarify where these occur in the pseudo-tree. i think it makes sense between ::before/after, not befor ethe ::before<br>
&lt;emilio> q+<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: we shoudl split that to a separat eissue. the current position was i think designed for &lt;option><br>
&lt;astearns> ack emilio<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> emilio: i was thinking this would be an element-backed pseudo-element, but if they're not...<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> emilio: if they were element-backed, they'd be between before/after<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> emilio: if they're not... is this auto-generated content pseudo?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: in current spec it says ::checkmark is before ::before. that's specifically for &lt;option>, where you want to put text between the checkmark and the option text<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: so i'm just asking for a resolution to make sure this exists for radio/checkbox as well<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: we can work thru its details after<br>
&lt;astearns> ack dbaron<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> dbaron: i was a little surprised about what emilio said, don't think element-backed implies a position relative to ::before/after<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> emilio: if they're a real element in a shadow tree, it shoudl... we could define that it doesn't, but it woudl be weird.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> dbaron: yeah i guess so<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> dbaron: not sure it *should* be this way. we might need to make that work at some point<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> emilio: maybe, or maybe we could make this a gencontent thing like ::before/after<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> emilio: we can punt to another issue<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: yes, so this issue is just whether ::checkmark should be the name for checkbox/radio<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: comments on the name, and it's application to checkbox/radio?<br>
&lt;fantasai> [tab and fantasai +1 to the proposal]<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Use ::checkmark for checkbox/radio<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: do we need someone to open an issue to define its relationship with ::before/after?<br>
&lt;dbaron> (and that's in addition to option, I assume)<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> ntim: yeah, i will<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5914#issuecomment-2770283144 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2025 18:03:35 UTC