//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileHeaderAlt
by @jakesimonds.com
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
ProfileReplies









Loading...
Please also look at my reply to this: github.com/LeaVerou/blo...
This is the second option, please vote?
(Naturally, AI agents were involved in this…)
Thanks for writing that up, I was also thinking that most people ended up ignoring the type argument. 😞 Though the result does still show us something important: that everyone, no matter what, finds it weird if the sibling rule is dropped. That’s not an acceptable tradeoff for *anybody*.
Do you mean interest invokers? Because :interest-target is a subfeature of that, which of course they wouldn't implement without the main feature (which they are opposed to, see github.com/WebKit/stand... )…
If I may ask, what makes interest invokers important to you?
After 16 years of using git, it finally happened: I came across a use case for using git to track changes to the .git directory itself. 🥲
Yes, but also… github.com/LeaVerou/blo... Spoiler: No, you can't get 100px, 200px, 300px with the current proposal, even if you don't type the --arg.
I actually asked the group if we should enable this yesterday, but didn't want to jump the gun and just enable it myself so I posted it in one of my own repos. But yes, eventually these should live in csswg-drafts.