Closed noamr closed 1 week ago
+1 to tree scoping the property including the keywords. Basically group only applies if its computed value has the same tree scope as the name?
Related issue for anchor positioning had the same resolution: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10526 and https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10525.
this property always resolves to none inside a shadow-tree
I wouldn't quite say that, for scoped transitions inside a shadow tree this value can be not none. But it makes sense to treat the property as unset or initial value if its computed value's tree scope mismatches the tree scope of the transition. That's what we do with names as well right? If a name is using inner tree scope, we ignore it when the transition is started in outer tree scope.
The CSS Working Group just discussed [css-view-transitions-2] `view-transition-group` and tree-scoping
, and agreed to the following:
RESOLVED: v-t-group keywords are all "tree-scoped" in behavior
Follow up on #10334
It's unclear how to specify
view-transition-group
in terms of shadow trees. Sure, we can make the<<custom-ident>>
a tree-scoped reference, which means it can't reference names from a different scope. However, what aboutnearest
keyword etc? Keywords are not usually "tree-scoped".Since
view-transition-name
is tree-scoped andview-transition-group
doesn't make much sense in isolation from it, suggesting that both idents and keywords inview-transition-group
are tree-scoped, and this property always resolves tonone
inside a shadow-tree.//cc @khushalsagar @vmpstr
See also #10529