CSS WG Blog Minutes Extended Telecon 2022-10-26

Minutes Extended Telecon 2022-10-26

Publications

• Resolved: Advance css-box-3 to PR
• Resolved: Accept the above changes
  • Statement about font-relative lengths and text shaping
  • Adding a definition of the device pixel
• Resolved: Publish updated CSS Values and Units L3 CR snapshot
• Resolved: Republish CRD of CSS Color 4

View Transitions

• Resolved: Use “snapshot viewport” for root element snapshot and UA CSS to size and position ::page-transition at snapshot viewport (Issue #7859: Define transitions over changing viewport)
• Resolved: ake khushal’s proposal to use pseudo-element syntax for view transitions (Issue #7928: Using pseudo-elements vs shadow DOM syntax)
• Resolved: Go with the Option 3 syntax (Issue #7788: CSS selector syntax for generated elements and API names). [Option 3: we select this as if they are all children of html:html::view-transition, html::view-transition-old(foo), etc]
• Resolved: Name the function .startViewTransition() (Issue #7788)
• Resolved: Synchronously generate styles for pseudo-DOM after DomUpdateCallback and before resolving ready promise (Issue #7812: When to update pseudo-element styles)
• Resolved: Update the UA stylesheet as needed in a new step after the current step 14 of “update the rendering” (after RO callbacks are done) (Issue #7812)

Nesting

• Resolved: Allow relative selectors for both nesting and @scope (Issue #7854: Allow relative selector syntax in @nest rules)
• The group revisited the four proposals to address issue #7834 (Syntax Invites Errors) which are detailed in the spec.
  • The original debate was between options 1 and 3 and in the last conversation there was also discussion that option 4 may get better results. Discussion first focused on option 1 vs 3.
  • Resolved: We’re taking option 3 over option 1 (Issue #7834)
  • It was not clear if option 3 or 4 was better and more examples need to be added as well as further developer engagement around this pair of options.
  • Resolved: Change the spec to reflect option 3 (Issue #7834)
  • Resolved: Open issue for further discussion of 3 vs 4 (Issue #7834)

Full Meeting Minutes Part I and Part II

« Previous article Next article »