[css-transitions-2] Add spec for @starting-style #8174 #8876
Conversation
|
I think the language about the global at-rules needs to be tightened up a bit. We don't have a good template text to work from yet, I'll see what I can put together. Also, this uses a different (third!) indentation style from the rest of the document. Please use tabs for indentation, as is used elsewhere in the spec text. |
I basically copied that from the container queries spec. Also, @scope needs the same specification. Wonder if we should have a common spec saying something about conditional rules that evaluate in an element context do not restrict those tree-scope-global rules.
Using tabs in the second commit. How does it look now? |
Yeah, we should, now that it's getting carried to multiple places. Don't worry about it for here, tho.
r+ |
css-transitions-2/Overview.bs
Outdated
|
|
||
| <div class=example> | ||
|
|
||
| Transitioning an element with opacity in and out of display:none: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps it would be useful to have a few sentences of explanation on why there are two display: none; opacity: 0; pieces and what each one does.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Realized display:none in the starting style was actually wrong. Corrected and commented.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, but I think it's probably still worth explaining what the two opacity: 0 declarations do -- and how one of them applies to the transition when class=hidden is removed and the other applies to the transition when class=hidden is added.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I sort of tried to do that already, and I've modified the description a bit, but I'm not quite sure how you'd want it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, mostly looks good, but I left a few comments.
There is no conditionText, which means we can inherit directly from CSSGroupingRule instead of CSSConditionRule. Result of spec PR review: w3c/csswg-drafts#8876 (comment) Bug: 1412851 Change-Id: Idbd174813b8894154a283885c3cfbdb35c6c9fcd Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4571598 Commit-Queue: Rune Lillesveen <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Joey Arhar <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#1158678}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry for the delay getting back to you -- should be mostly back in my normal work location this week after visiting a bunch of folks in my team (3907km away) last week.
When you reply, I should catch the email -- but if you hit the "re-request review" button next to my username, that will slightly lower the risk that I miss it.
css-transitions-2/Overview.bs
Outdated
|
|
||
| <div class=example> | ||
|
|
||
| Transitioning an element with opacity in and out of display:none: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, but I think it's probably still worth explaining what the two opacity: 0 declarations do -- and how one of them applies to the transition when class=hidden is removed and the other applies to the transition when class=hidden is added.
css-transitions-2/Overview.bs
Outdated
|
|
||
| <div class=example> | ||
|
|
||
| Transitioning an element with opacity in and out of display:none: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, mostly looks good, but I left a few comments.
[css-transitions-2] Add spec for @starting-style #8174