Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-forms-1] Allow styling of input[type=number] number spinner (#8777)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-forms-1] Allow styling of input[type=number] number spinner`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Accept the 3 pseudos that are currently in the spec`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: Want to sign-off what's in the spec<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: Addition of step-up and step-down<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: step-control is a wrapper<br>
&lt;zcorpan> astearns: Adding those details to the issue, to see if the commenter is satisfied, might be a good idea<br>
&lt;emilio> q+<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ack emilio<br>
&lt;astearns> ack emilio<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: There's implicit, two things there. One, appearance: textfield must not generate those<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: is that interoperable today?<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: It's not the current behavior in webkit<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: OK, we probably need to keep that for compat. We don't expose the pseudos<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: The other thing is mobile browsers don't generate these by default<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: Should that be encoded in the UA stylesheet? Allowed by teh spec?<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: I don't know<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: The styles need to be consistent for appearance: base. Haven't thought so much about other appearance<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: the spec presumes that order works. Should specify the base styles?<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: yes, base appearance should use flexbox<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: example uses (MISSED) on the container<br>
&lt;astearns> s/(MISSED)/display:contents/<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: display: block<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: seems weird. Gecko uses flexbox<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: could make sense<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: should add more details to the spec, how they are styled and what we want to allow. Remove the spinners on mobile<br>
&lt;zcorpan> emilio: OK with exposing these three<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: Good points. Should do more analysis on the default style<br>
&lt;zcorpan> astearns: Are we taking a resolution? Apart from adding more details<br>
&lt;zcorpan> ntim: I was hoping we could resolve on having 3 pseudos<br>
&lt;zcorpan> astearns: So what's already in the spec<br>
&lt;zcorpan> astearns: Any other comments?<br>
&lt;zcorpan> Proposed resolution: Accept the 3 pseudos that are currently in the spec<br>
&lt;jarhar> +1<br>
&lt;zcorpan> RESOLVED: Accept the 3 pseudos that are currently in the spec<br>
&lt;jarhar> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12510<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8777#issuecomment-3164633431 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Thursday, 7 August 2025 15:16:11 UTC