Re: [csswg-drafts] Pseudo classes for the `interestfor` API (#12154)

The CSS Working Group just discussed ``Pseudo classes for the `interestfor` API``, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Add :interest-invoker and :interest-target, with issue about naming`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: We discussed this a bit ago, about the pseudo-classes for interest invokers<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: lot of discussion centered around the proposed functional form, designed for rhte partial interest concept<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: could indicate if you cared about partial or full, etc<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: separately, we discussed removing partial interest from the API entirely<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: conclusion is it was a lot of machinery for minimal (maybe negative) benefit<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: so we killed it<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: proposal for now, then, is to add just the non-functional pseudos<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: naming might be the biggest discussion<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: currently :interest-invoker and :interest-target<br>
&lt;lea> q+<br>
&lt;astearns> ack fantasai<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: for naming, interest target is ambiguous - if it's the target of your interest, isn't that the invoker? that's the thing you indicated interest in<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: would be nice to use  a word without "target"<br>
&lt;astearns> ack lea<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: kinda agree. only other suggestion i've heard is "target-of-interest" but that still leaves target. suggestions welcome<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> lea: do think dropping partial interest was the right idea, found it confusing<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> lea: bigger question<br>
&lt;fantasai> :interest-details? :interest-info? :interest-more-stuff?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> lea: interest invokers are like regular command invokers, but are invoked by lighter actions (hover, etc) instead of clicking?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: yes<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> lea: i'd propose a syntax that ties them together with the existing command invokers, from an author's perspective these are closely related<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> lea: you've still got a command invokers, it's just invoked in a different way. so what about, rather than a different attribute we had a way to change how the command was invoked. more extensible in the future if we have more invoker verbs<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> lea: just  uncomfortable introducing a new concept to the web for a very similar thing<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: this is a bigger question than this issue.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: but we've had a lot of discussion about this exact thing in openUI. interest invokers are unique in certain ways<br>
&lt;fantasai> :interest-dialog?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: we discussed allowing dialogs to be the target, but those still dont' apply well with interest - don't want to open modals with a light interaction like focus<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: don't wanna go into detail, i'll post the issue, but we concluded that they do feel similar (so parallel naming) but are separate things<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: maybe we can talk abo9ut it at the task force meeting<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> lea: thanks. all the use-cases are popovers or tooltips, those are all popover=hint. are there other use-cases?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: this is unrelated. popover=hint is about what *else* gets closed when you open this popover.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: this is instead about what opens the popover.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: popover=hint is, right now, impossible to use correctly without JS, because you have to listen for mousover/mouse out/focusing/focus out. otherwise a click is a light dismiss and dismisses everything<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: so this is really the other half of hint<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: is there appetite for adding these two non-functional pseudo-classes, with renaming being a possibility, or do people want to spend longer lookinga t he use-cases?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> +1 to approving the pseudos<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: hearing no immediate concerns, proposed resolution is we add the two non-fucntional pseudos :interest-invoker and :interest-target, bikeshedding tbd<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: can we mark an issue on the names? to make it clear we're looking for better suggestions<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> (I understand fantasai's objection but think "target" is fine here.)<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: maybe after this call I can call for suggestions in the issue<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: yeah, that would be fine<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: let's start a new issue, we don't need all the context about interest, just about the naming confusion.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> masonf: sure, the naming discussion is limited anyway so it's easy to link back to context<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> astearns: objections?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Add :interest-invoker and :interest-target, with issue about naming<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12154#issuecomment-3109288299 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 23 July 2025 16:16:34 UTC