Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] CSS view transition auto name generation (Issue #1001)

noamr left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1001)

> The TAG has previously been concerned about CSS using `auto` for meanings that aren't going to be obvious to authors. See [#1011 (comment)](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1011#issuecomment-2460300421). This may be another case where the CSSWG forgot to bikeshed the name before approving it. Looking at the history:
> 
> * 2024 Sept 11: [CSSWG resolved to provide a keyword that falls back between `id` and element identity.](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8320#issuecomment-2344208387) The resolution does _not_ pick "auto" as that name.
> * 2024 Oct 1: [@noamr](https://github.com/noamr)'s [[css-view-transitions-2] Allow `auto` as a keyword w3c/csswg-drafts#10922](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/10922) merged the `auto` name into the view-transitions draft. I couldn't find any resolution saying that was the right name.

Look at the minutes: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8320#issuecomment-2344208387
The spec change was based on the meeting minutes in which we've discussed and resolved on this, though the official resolution line didn't state the name.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1001#issuecomment-2770536323
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1001/2770536323@github.com>