L. David Baron

(Though maybe activating something inside an element precludes activating the ancestor element by the same action.)

I somewhat relaxed the restriction in the Chromium implementation in https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3996338 .

Another related question is whether a descendant with `toggle-trigger` should count as a descendant with existing activation behavior (that prevents the ancestor from being activated at the same time).

Some questions that come to mind: * should making an element disabled cause a `toggle-trigger` on it to stop working? * if so, should making an element disabled cause the...

Oh, and according to @vmpstr, the important aspect of selection behavior with `content-visibility: auto` is that having a selection in something that is `content-visibility: auto` prevents its contents from being...

One possibility is that `toggle-visibility` != `normal` should work like `content-visibility: auto`, except connected to the toggle instead of connected to being on-screen. (Right now the spec says that it's...

That said, `contain` affects a lot of CSS properties, and having whether `contain` is present depend on toggle state means a *ton* of CSS property computed values would suddenly depend...

"like a new value of `content-visibility`" was sort of how I was thinking about the implementation.

(An interesting question for the case of keeping it a distinct property is what to do when both `content-visibility` and `toggle-visibility` have non-initial values. I'm inclined to follow `content-visibility` since...

I started to implement this, and then realized there are some interesting cases. In particular, what does the following do: ```html #outer { toggle-root: t 1 at 1; } #inner...