w3c

csswg-drafts

Bikeshed2016–2026

w3c / csswg-drafts

csswg-drafts

CSS Working Group Editor Drafts

Developer Tools Web Development

Explore on GitHub Read Hacker News discussions

87Distinct people

121Mentions

3Explicit recommenders

4.9KGitHub stars

REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

CSS Working Group Editor Drafts

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

Huh (having scanned but not read in detail the post), interesting approach. I'm not that well-versed in this area (as a game developer, I tend to jump straight to…

jan_Inkepa used a recommendation phrase. 3 indexed comments match. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 9:02:44 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year121 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2016-09-21 13:16:42 UTC to 2026-10-08 18:33:14 UTC.

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges

UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
Period	Start (UTC)	End (exclusive, UTC)	Mentions	Submissions	Comments
2016	2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	1	1	0
2017	2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	8	2	6
2018	2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	6	2	4
2019	2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	8	1	7
2020	2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	13	3	10
2021	2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	10	1	9
2022	2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	19	3	16
2023	2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	20	3	17
2024	2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	10	0	10
2025	2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	15	0	15
2026 (partial)	2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	11	2	9

From the project README

An excerpt from the repository, fetched Nov 13, 2026.

Read the project’s introduction

Types of Workflows workflows/build-specs.yml - builds the entire repository of Editor's Drafts, along with a summary page. Also builds any .issues Issues-List files, and Markdown files. Deploys all the results to the repo's gh-pages workflows/SPEC-NAME-1.yml - each of these auto-publish one spec in the repo. Do not modify them by hand; they are auto-generated by generate-auto-publish-workflows.py and auto-publish-template.yml. Instead, update and run this .py file and commit the results.

Read the full README on GitHub

What Hacker News says

10 sources

Guidii·Sep 22, 2021

Hi there Matt - this looks like an amazing library - thanks for posting. I’m part of the Blink Animations team that work on WAAPI (along with a bunch of folks from other browsers), and wanted to touch base on a few of the issues you raised. First, I agree that fill behavior[1] is messy, and should probably be considered to be a spec bug. Moving web specifications forward often involves “compromises” to ensure that new functionality works alongside existing work, and this is a good example of that. There’s a discussion on this at github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5394. You raise a few issues with the current implementation/compliance/interop. Getting compliant and consistent implementations of the spec is critically important, so appreciate your feedback on this. I’m seeing two items that (might) relate to chromium here: individual transf

Read the rest

orms[2] - agree that this is important - currently working on it - see crbug.com/696374. Note: You can already get some of this working using composite:add. .finished Promise[3] - mostly working in chromium AFAIK, with one minor glitch - crbug.com/1141935 If there are other chromium issues we’d love for you to file them (use Blink>Animation component so they land on our triage). Other browsers look for feedback as well - there’s a good guide/walkthrough at https://web.dev/how-to-file-a-good-bug/ On the topic of browser compliance, you cited caniuse.com, which is a good starting point. More detailed tracking can be found at https://wpt.fyi/results/web-animations - might be more detailed than you’re looking for, but this is what our team measures against. Some of your suggestions relate to the spec. Durations as seconds[4], and Simplifying cubic bezier definitions seem fairly straightforward, while others like cancelling and interrupting might be a little more complicated. In any case you can file issues against the spec if you want to move those forward - https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues, tag with [web-animations-2]. To reduce the challenges of adopting the new API, there’s a published polyfill that you seem to be using already. You noted that there’s some inconsistency with keyframing across browsers - perhaps you could file an issue against the polyfill? Cheers! [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/web-animations-1/#fill-behavior [2] https://motion.dev/guides/waapi-improvements#individual-tran... [3] https://motion.dev/guides/waapi-improvements#finished-promis... [4] https://motion.dev/guides/waapi-improvements#durations-as-se... - this might already be addressed through CSSOM? [5] https://github.com/web-animations/web-animations-js [6] https://github.com/web-animations/web-animations-js/issues

In Show HN: Motion One – New animation library, built on the Web Animations API

JimDabell·Sep 1, 2021

It’s not apparent from the document posted, but this is actually almost six years old [0] and already implemented as a PostCSS plugin for just as long [1]. It was adopted by the CSS Working Group a couple of years ago [2]. So this is very well-established and you’ve been able to use this syntax for many years. But it’s good to see it moving forward and hopefully browsers will implement it soon now. [0] https://tabatkins.github.io/specs/css-nesting/ [1] https://github.com/csstools/postcss-nesting [2] https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/2878

In CSS Nesting Module

chrismorgan·Jun 8, 2021

Here are two robust techniques that I haven’t seen actually employed in production for maybe fifteen years: ① A submit button or link targeting an iframe which is visually hidden. (Or even don’t hide it. If only seamless iframes had happened, or any other way of auto-resizing an iframe: relevant spec issues are https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/555 and https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1771.) ② A submit button or link to a URL that returns status 204 No Content. (CSS image loading in any form is not as robust because some clients will have images disabled. background-image is probably (unverified claim!) less robust than pseudoelement content as accessibility modes (like high contrast) are more likely to strip background images, though I’m not sure if they are skipped outright or load and aren’t shown. :active is neither robu

Read the rest

st nor correct: it doesn’t respond to keyboard activation, and it’s triggered on mouse down rather than mouse up. Little tip here for a thing that people often get wrong: mouse things activate on mouseup, keyboard things on keydown.)

In Fastly Outage

RheingoldRiver·Jun 4, 2021

There's a limitation to `position:sticky;` though, which is that it will not work inside of ANY parent that's `overflow:auto` or `overflow:hidden`. I hope this gets addressed in a future version of the spec one day. Gtihub issue: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/865 The biggest issue that happens to me is that I'll have a large data table where I want `overflow-x:auto` with a sticky header, and this is just impossible without Javascript. Of course, the UX of such a table is not ideal, but sometimes nothing will substitute for a large data table when you have a lot of data that goes into a table and people want to see it.

In HTML and CSS techniques to reduce your JavaScript

nailer·May 21, 2021

You still need spacers in 2021 to add bottom padding to CSS grid: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/129#issuecomment-...

In Learn CSS

nailer·May 21, 2021Submission

5 years later, bottom padding still doesn't work on CSS grid

3 points · Open discussion

o_____________o·May 12, 2021

On that note, masonry layout is finally coming to CSS: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-grid-3/ https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4650 (Think Pinterest layout with ltr ordering, which is extremely problematic in pure CSS)

In CSS Houdini

FrontAid·Apr 22, 2021

Container queries have been suggested for a while now, it is not a new idea. But it has gained a lot of momentum recently, for example [1]. So maybe it will not be years until all modern browsers might support it. Until then, you might want to try [2] (not a polyfill, but a workaround with JavaScript). [1] https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5796 [2] https://philipwalton.com/articles/responsive-components-a-so...

In The anti-pattern of responsive design

jan_Inkepa·Mar 31, 2021

At someone's recommendation a while ago I made a proposal for integer-multiple upscaling - https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5967 . It feels very niche, especially given how complex the standards already are, but OTOH I'd use it if it were a thing... (Also, that linked page is very cool, and shows how awfully tricky the problem is...none of the proposed solutions work on my iPad, especially not once one zooms in/out in the browser - oh it turns out it was related to browser zoom level - at normal zoom they work (sometimes when I resize the page at normal zoom it works, sometimes it doesn't...). So I guess it's 70% of the way there...but not all the way there).

In Let’s fix font size

neop1x·Feb 3, 2021

w3c never wanted to implement physical units [1], saying OS are not reporting screen DPI reliably, etc. I understand they had to start with something and 20 years ago no one expected thre will ever be monitors with DPI > 96 but I don't understand why the situation hasn't changed yet. Now that we have many physical screen sizes with vastly varying densities. In my opinion, devices with a screen are like a sheet of paper. Imagine a tablet or Remarkable eink. You can print only that small font on such paper. If the font is too small, we can use a magnifying glass or, in case of electronic devices, clever scaling mode. If that was implemented, buying a bigger monitor would actually mean we could fit more content, wider newspaper there. The current situation is just a mess with designers just randomly guessing how it's gonna look on most curre

Read the rest

nt devices and using media queries to somehow automagically solve it all. But it is not uncommon to see a website on a huge hi-DPI monitor in such a way that a heading takes 1/4 of the screen height and there are empty unused paddings everywhere. I.e. if you buy a bigger monitor, everything just gets bigger, including most of fonts, unnecesarily. Sometimes all you get is three columns of text instead of one. Sometimes. If media queries are set up reasonably well. But even then, on high-resolution screens there is sometimes big empty space on the left and right side because it is just "highest-width" media query and designers didn't expect you would have so many pixels horizontally... [1] https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/614

In Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone