- From: Ian Kilpatrick via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 22:52:09 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
For the "scrolling containing block" I think we should use if you have a valid https://drafts.csswg.org/css-anchor-position-1/#default-anchor-element (even if it is implicit)
E.g. if you have a default anchor element you'll be shifted with it upon scroll, so you should get the special "scrolling containing block" as well.
The primary reason why this matters is currently there is a pretty large behaviour difference between:
```
.anchored1 {
position-anchor: --a;
position-area: bottom;
}
.anchored2 {
position-anchor: --a;
top: anchor(bottom);
}
```
which IMO is a mistake.
The "scrolling containing block" matters most when you are applying the scroll transform IMO.
(and then provide a switch for opting into the "scrolling containing block" if you really need to for other usecases).
--
GitHub Notification of comment by bfgeek
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12552#issuecomment-3141570111 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 31 July 2025 22:52:10 UTC