From ea886017ebcdef3d8d9aabe441eccd9b89d42c50 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Vladimir Levin Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 11:30:44 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] css-view-transitions-2: update visibility vs opacity wording --- css-view-transitions-2/Overview.bs | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/css-view-transitions-2/Overview.bs b/css-view-transitions-2/Overview.bs index d0bb7d14fe90..b5faa9292a0e 100644 --- a/css-view-transitions-2/Overview.bs +++ b/css-view-transitions-2/Overview.bs @@ -1320,7 +1320,7 @@ ISSUE: `::view-transition-group-children()` needs to be specified here. the boxes generated by any element in that {{Document}} with [=captured in a view transition=] and its [=element contents=], except [=ViewTransition/transition root pseudo-element=]'s [=tree/inclusive descendants=], - are not painted (as if they had ''visibility: hidden'') and + are not painted (as if they had ''opacity: 0'') and do not respond to hit-testing (as if they had ''pointer-events: none''). Note: Elements participating in a transition need to skip painting in their DOM location because @@ -3463,6 +3463,7 @@ This appendix is informative. Changes from 2024-05-16 Working Draft +* Update wording to use `opacity: 0` instead of `visibility: hidden`. See issue 12629. * Replace `contain: view-transition` with `view-transition-scope` property (pending #13123) * Reorder sections, editorial changes, added several issues, updated scoped view transition wording. * Add waitUntil() (#9901)