-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 679
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[css-display][css-aam][selectors-4] How elements with display:contents
get focused?
#2632
Comments
It doesn't make much sense to focus something that doesn't have a box. |
@emilio The intention of For example, you might want to switch the appearance of a widget from a drop-down list on small screens to a radio-button style layout on larger screens, by making the container disappear and just laying out the options. However, you would still want the widget container (the element that replaces the role of a Or, you might have a link containing both an image and a text block. For layout purposes, you want to lay out the two parts as independent children of the parent layout context, but they are still a single link for accessibility and function. (Note: current browser implementations of The I like the idea of extending the properties that apply to highlight pseudo-elements to also apply to
The only ones which apply in a way different from simply inheriting to child content are |
Whether or not an element is focused has no relation to whether it's in the box tree or not. (It might affect whether some methods of focus-traversal can reach it, but you can always Whether or not the element is We shouldn't try to get extra-smart with this; the element is gone, there's nothing to apply a background or anything else to. (Note, for example, that if you |
Respectfully disagree. If the element is interactive, can get activated and responds to events as usual, and its activation behavior can have a visual effect on its contents, I see no reasons why this element can't get focus. Making the element and all its subtree completely unfocusable just because if is displayed differently (not hidden/removed!) is a real usability problem and very unlikely matches the authors' intent to just change the element's presentation, but not changing its semantics nor behavior. Having some "virtual" focus state for the invisible element that can make visual change through the element's descendants seems to be much less problematic than having the element and its whole visible subtree completely not focusable.
@tabatkins, could you please show an example? The only way how CSS can prevent the visible and otherwise focusable element from getting focus through click/tap I can quickly imagine is |
FWIW, I agree that making descendants not focusable is a bug. I haven't been able to reproduce it in FF Nighly / FF 58, (EDIT: I was going to file myself a Chrome bug and couldn't repro anymore, so probably I wasn't testing what I thought I was testing). |
It's not clear to me that focusing elements without a box is great in general... It'd be confusing to have to tab twice to get to the <!doctype html>
<div style="display: contents" tabindex="0">
<input>
<div tabindex="0">Focused?</div>
</div> Which UI should the browser show when the display: contents element is focused? Note that it has no box, it's descendants could be anywhere in the layout tree. It seems like a really weird behavior to explain to any user IMO... I could be convinced otherwise I guess. In any case agreed that we should special-case as little as needed. Special cases = bugs. |
Completely agree that it's weird. Exactly like so is the focus behavior of, e.g., an off-screen positioned element with on-screen absolutely positioned children, or the focus behavior of the element with good old But removing the element from the accessibility tree altogether without any possibility to bring its displayed parts back into it, as browsers currently seem to do, looks way more problematic to me, regardless how good the intent of this behavior was. |
I imagine that
Note - I was responding to the idea that |
To me, From P.S. Regarding |
That is not what This is why it's not good for the case you're talking about. For example, as far as CSS is concerned, The input+label example you bring up doesn't apply either; the input is offscreen, but still present in the page, so it can still be tabbed to and focused by user interaction just fine. You just can't click on it because it's not on screen; this is no different from it just being obscured by another element. This is very different from the element not existing in the rendering structure at all. |
Well, I'm OK with After all, in #2355 we added the following text:
Doesn't this imply that the interactive element with no box but with visible children is just the element that can't be styled on focus itself, not the element that magically became not focusable? |
Agreed. I would expect the element to be in a focused state, but just not having any visual indication of that state, unless the author picked a descendant element to show an outline (or other distinctive styling). |
I think outline should work on display contents elements. Just like it works if an online gets split into lines or bidi or even regions or by a block-in-inline. I think the element should be focusable and tab-focusable too, but only if it is not replaced or a shadow host or none of its descendants in the light tree produce a box. The elements in cases noted above behave as if they were display none and should therefore not be focusable. Besides outline and a few other properties like pointer-event, properties should have no effect on the elements that do generate boxes for their descendants, besides being inherited by default. |
An inline getting split across lines is still generating fragments - focusing doesn't need to care whether there are 1 or more fragments, it works similarly in either case. But zero fragments is a very different case. Where is that outline supposed to go??? There is zero promise of content contiguity here; if you A |
I think a case can be made here.
|
Now to the question "does the spec say you should have an outline in that case" I'd say probably no. Whether it should say so is another question. You will have to answer these questions anyway when working on exposing these elements to assistive technologies. If these elements are there for semantic purposes, they must be exposed, and you will somehow need to synthetize something for them. |
I guess this is 100% true from the (current) implementer's perspective, but not from the user's. If something is nothing at all, it can't have any visible/interactive parts at all. If the user sees and interacts with something, it can't be nothing — it actually is the visible and interactive element that can only be partially hidden. Even if its main part is hidden, the one that gets the focus outline. That's why it's OK for me if such element can't be styled directly on focus — it's really nothing to be styled directly — but it's not OK to have no focus state for it (that I could use to style its visible descendants) at all.
With all due respect, I can't agree with treating the visible part of the Maybe it would be better to make this pseudo-element proposal a separate issue, and focus on the focusability of the |
Yes, and that is exactly the case here. There is absolutely no visible/interactive parts of the element on the screen. It's children are visible, but that's something entirely different. display:contents, insofar as possible, makes it so that the element was never in the page at all. (It exists so you can add wrappers for scripting or a11y purposes that aren't intended to show up in the page itself.) As far as CSS is concerned, there is literally nothing there. |
Functionally, the element subtree is clearly the part of the element: it passes the events to the element, it inherits the CSS properties where possible, and it triggers the element's activation behavior. The only thing that
and not the interactivity of the element and its descendants (with the one and only exception for the In my opinion, we should find the way to preserve the states of the boxless active elements that the user can interact with trough their subtree. Although technically it's a new problem for CSS, functionally it reminds me much of the case of visible labels for off-screen controls I mentioned before. |
Wow, ok, so my conclusion about all this is the following:
Is there anything else I missed here? |
@fantasai I'm not that sure about this. An element with |
Note whatwg/html#3947 too, regarding that :) |
Though for |
This is as sort-of-resolved in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 . This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails as a result, but is added anyway. The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Fixed: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
This is as sort-of-resolved in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 . This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko passes the display: block test but fails the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Fixed: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
This is as sort-of-resolved in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 . This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Fixed: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
This is as sort-of-resolved in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549 and https://bugzil.la/1791648) and WebKit. This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Fixed: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
I've written (but not yet merged) a change to Chromium to do this, that is, to make elements with I'm somewhat concerned about landing it given that there seems to be some resistance from other implementors. It's not clear to me whether other implementors are actually willing to make this change, and I think it would be good to find out before changing Chromium to diverge from a currently-interoperable behavior. However, I agree that that currently interoperable behavior is bad. It's important that the resolutions of #2355 and of this issue be consistent, since (as I understand things) part of the contract of reporting to assistive technology that an element has a particular role is that this exposure implies that the element should also have the keyboard behaviors associated with that role (which admittedly not all roles have, but many do). So I think we should either change our resolution of neither issue (which implies that implementations need to change on focusability), or change both (which I think implies implementations need to change AT exposure). I'm curious whether others think that this issue should be reopened in order to build stronger consensus around the correct behavior here. |
Just to add a little bit more detail about the idea that ARIA roles and keyboard behavior should match: this is documented pretty clearly in the author-focused guidance in https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/apg/practices/keyboard-interface/ but I think that guidance also applies to the design of browser engines (which that guidance effectively assumes do things correctly). |
This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Fixed: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
This aligns HTML with the conclusion in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 that elements with CSS `display: contents` should be focusable just like normally-rendered elements.
FYI, some followups that resulted from this include whatwg/html#9425 and the position requests and bugs linked from it. |
This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Fixed: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Fixed: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
This aligns HTML with the conclusion in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 that elements with CSS `display: contents` should be focusable just like normally-rendered elements.
Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Fixed: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e
Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3910374 Reviewed-by: Mason Freed <masonf@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: David Baron <dbaron@chromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#1252245}
Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3910374 Reviewed-by: Mason Freed <masonf@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: David Baron <dbaron@chromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#1252245}
Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3910374 Reviewed-by: Mason Freed <masonf@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: David Baron <dbaron@chromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#1252245}
…isplay:contents to be focused., a=testonly Automatic update from web-platform-tests Add support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused. Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3910374 Reviewed-by: Mason Freed <masonf@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: David Baron <dbaron@chromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#1252245} -- wpt-commits: 83ac63c35c3c699dab5c8ec3b60377f52f59ca11 wpt-pr: 39247
…isplay:contents to be focused., a=testonly Automatic update from web-platform-tests Add support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused. Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3910374 Reviewed-by: Mason Freed <masonf@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: David Baron <dbaron@chromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#1252245} -- wpt-commits: 83ac63c35c3c699dab5c8ec3b60377f52f59ca11 wpt-pr: 39247
This aligns HTML with the conclusion in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 that elements with CSS `display: contents` should be focusable just like normally-rendered elements. It fixes a piece of #1837.
…isplay:contents to be focused., a=testonly Automatic update from web-platform-tests Add support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused. Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3910374 Reviewed-by: Mason Freed <masonfchromium.org> Commit-Queue: David Baron <dbaronchromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main{#1252245} -- wpt-commits: 83ac63c35c3c699dab5c8ec3b60377f52f59ca11 wpt-pr: 39247 UltraBlame original commit: 750cbf39a61f63ccdf2d1384fdf9c8ef8e7c98ec
…isplay:contents to be focused., a=testonly Automatic update from web-platform-tests Add support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused. Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3910374 Reviewed-by: Mason Freed <masonfchromium.org> Commit-Queue: David Baron <dbaronchromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main{#1252245} -- wpt-commits: 83ac63c35c3c699dab5c8ec3b60377f52f59ca11 wpt-pr: 39247 UltraBlame original commit: 750cbf39a61f63ccdf2d1384fdf9c8ef8e7c98ec
Chromestatus: https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 This lands support for allowing elements with display:contents to be focused, behind a feature flag that is created with status:experimental. This is as concluded (though without a group resolution) in w3c/csswg-drafts#2632 and as discussed a bit in whatwg/html#1837 and proposed in whatwg/html#9425 . Note that this diverges from Gecko (see https://bugzil.la/1553549, https://bugzil.la/1791648, and mozilla/standards-positions#772) and WebKit (see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255149 and WebKit/standards-positions#164). This makes the <slot> element focusable when it has a tabindex. Note that this does not match Gecko and WebKit, which also require that its 'display' value is changed (away from 'contents') to make it focusable. Note that the <slot> element is still not tabbable in Chrome; this is https://crbug.com/1428419. This also does not match Gecko and WebKit, where it is tabbable whenever it is focusable. The added test slot-element-tabbable.tentative.html fails both tests as a result, but is added anyway. (Gecko and WebKit pass the display: block test but fail the default style (display: contents) test.) The added tests display-contents-focusable-001.html and slot-element-focusable.tentative.html are partly fixed by this change, but the style part is still broken due to https://crbug.com/1428420. Bug: 1366037 Bug: 1428419, 1428420 Change-Id: I46a8ad3b6442ce07f440c8f6a07210bac305600e Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3910374 Reviewed-by: Mason Freed <masonf@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: David Baron <dbaron@chromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#1252245}
In #2355, we clarified that only
display:none
can affect the element's semantics and interactivity, so element withdisplay: contents
should preserve all its interactivity, including the ability to get the:focus
(and:focus-visible
) state. However, it's not clear how this state should work for this element.Like the element with no boxes can be in
:hover
state (see #1141), making it possible to choose its descendants with selectors like.no-boxes-element:hover .something
, I believe that the element that would receive focus withoutdisplay: contents
should receive it withdisplay: contents
as well. So its descendants should match the selectors like.no-boxes-element:focus .something
, and its ancestors should match the:focus-within
pseudo-class, making it possible to make the focus change visible despite the element itself is not displayed. And the fact that current browsers (at least, Firefox and Chrome) don't apply focus to the element withdisplay:contents
is the bug of these browsers. The element is still there in the DOM, it still can be activated, so there is no reason to skip the focus for it.However, it's still not very clear how should the
:focus
state work for the element withdisplay: contents
itself. I suppose the easiest way to implement it is to only apply the:focus
styles to the element's contents via inheritance. This would mean that the elements withdisplay: contents
would not get the default browser "focus ring", but the changes of color, background etc. would be inherited automatically by the element's descendants, and authors would be able to explicitly style the specific descendants of these invisible focused elements.Another option can be to introduce a new pseudo-element like
::selection
that would span all the visible contents of the invisible element and get the default browser focus decoration, so the focus would be always visible, but this approach looks more complicated.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: