Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-view-transitions-2] [scoped] Clarify the ::v-t box and stacking context position relative to the scope (#12324)

I prefer option 1. If we require the root to participate, there are two concerns:
1. If we can't agree on a reasonable way to handle pointer-events for participating elements, you have to carefully ensure the scope is a descendant of interactive elements even if it has no animation.
2. Even if we do have a way to allow pointer-events, it is potentially permanently requiring that we capture the root.

> ie in any other situation view-transition-group: contain with view-transition-name: none would have no effect

I could see enabling this more generally being useful to keep your participating vts from escaping ancestor clips without having to have those ancestor clips explicitly capture their content. E.g. we would create the necessary structural pseudo-elements to apply the element's clipping only.

It seems like the main concerns being raised is both wanting to see selectable pseudo-elements in the tree, but not wanting to see them because the name was set to none. Do they *need* to be uniquely selectable by developers or could they have a generic unnamed pseudo-element tag or perhaps a name similar to match-element (i.e. not developer exposed).

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by flackr
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12324#issuecomment-3638245657 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2025 17:41:24 UTC