Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Cross-document View Transitions API (Issue #851)

Hi @khushalsagar,

Thanks for your response! I cannot speak for the rest of the TAG before discussing it again, but all sounds good to me.

> On that note, we had a discussion today about the ordering subtlety with media queries. For example, if the author CSS is as follows:
> 
> ```css
> @media (prefers-reduced-motion) {
>   @view-transitions {
>     navigation-trigger: cross-document;
>   }
> }
> 
> @view-transitions {
>   navigation-trigger: cross-document;
> }
> ```
> 
> Then the media-query declaration would be a no-op since the second rule would win. This is because media queries by design don't add any specificity. We were wondering whether we should have a bespoke syntax to add specificity (instead of media queries) for customizing based on old/new Document URLs. Doesn't seem worth the complexity since authors will have to ensure correct ordering for other queries like `prefers-reduced-motion` anyway. Open to any suggestions here.

I suspect there's a mistake in this example, since both declarations are identical?

This sounds like an issue to bring up with the CSS WG. FWIW it sounds like this may be adding to the pile of use cases for a selector that represents the document itself.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/851#issuecomment-1651519458
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/851/1651519458@github.com>