Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] ScrollIntoViewOptions container attribute (Issue #1105)

flackr left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1105)

> The TAG agrees that this solves a clear issue with `scrollIntoView`. The discussion in [w3c/csswg-drafts#9452](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9452) looks to have discussed a few potential shapes for the solution, and while the CSSWG ultimately [resolved](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9452#issuecomment-2607879021) to use an enum rather than allowing a particular element to be specified, the spec still leaves some uncertainty: [w3c/csswg-drafts#12260](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12260). Could you take a look at the questions [@zcorpan](https://github.com/zcorpan) raised there?

Thanks, the only exposed change here is the enum values "nearest" or "all". The algorithm as currently specified internally allows specs to pass a container element however this is not something that developers can access. The generalized algorithm is there to allow for use by the overflow-5 spec to ensure that scroll markers do not propagate scrolling beyond their associated scroll container, however this is not part of this feature.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1105#issuecomment-2980678588
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1105/2980678588@github.com>