Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Specification review for CSS Anchor Positioning (Issue #848)

Thanks for the comment @LeaVerou!

> Hi @mfreed7, I see in the I2S TAG review is listed as "Issues addressed", but the last we said was…

I can see that concern. It’s more of a question about our I2S process – “Issues addressed” means we responded to questions raised so far.

> **We have not actually reviewed this design at all.** All comments were about the earlier version, which (my understanding is) is _substantially_ different.

Thanks. While you’re right that substantial improvements have been made in the last year, I hope you’ll find that the spirit of the feature and the overall feature set hasn’t changed much, when you get a chance to review them. Your comment from the last review was:

> We looked at this today. Overall this looks great, and covers use cases that developers desperately need covered.
> 
> Q: What is the fallback if no @anchor-fallback is specified? Is there no fallback, or is the fallback UA dependent?

And then there’s a conversation further about the fallback behavior. If anything, I believe the new state of the feature, particularly the `inset-area` syntax, directly addresses your comments.

> That said, if it's shipping, and if it would be useful, we can definitely prioritize reviewing it.

We generally find all feedback useful, and we’re committed to addressing any issues that can be addressed. So if the TAG is willing to give it a followup review, that’d be great!


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/848#issuecomment-2058045690
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/848/2058045690@github.com>