Skip to content

[scroll-animations-1] Are timeline names tree-scoped? #8135

Closed

Description

@andruud

I initially thought "yes", but then https://drafts.csswg.org/css-scoping/#shadow-names seemed to only apply to "global names" (i.e. names created by at-rules), which is not quite the case for scroll timeline names.

There's a discussion in #7916 in relation to anchor/CQ names, which seems to expect that names (also non-"global" names) are tree-scoped by default?

Either way, it would be good to state it explicitly.

Activity

  1. fantasai commented on Dec 7, 2022

    @fantasai
    Collaborator

    Last time we discussed it, we decided that timeline names would be scoped across the flattened tree: see minutes

    Lmk if you think we should reconsider for some reason

  2. bramus commented on Jan 23, 2023

    @bramus
    Contributor

    Discussion continued in #8192?

  3. flackr commented on Jan 31, 2023

    @flackr
    Contributor

    I'm not sure what to do about this issue, it seems like it was resolved in #7047 (as mentioned by @fantasai above #8135 (comment) ) and there is a separate issue as mentioned by @bramus #8135 (comment) . Do we close this and leave it to those other issues?

  4. andruud commented on Feb 1, 2023

    @andruud
    MemberAuthor

    This is not the same issue as #8192. That affects anonymous timeline lookups as well (scroll()), while this does not. Not having tree-scoped timelines does not match @tabatkins' most recent thinking in #7916 in my opinion. However, if we're still sure about the #7047 decision, then I'm happy to close this issue. Tree-scoped names are painful to implement anyway.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions