Repository navigation
Conversation
Contributor
|
Tip: Review these changes grouped by change (recommended for most PRs), or grouped by feature (for large PRs). |
Elchi3
approved these changes
Sep 17, 2026
Elchi3
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the quick revert, Daniel! 👍
Merged
Contributor
ddbeck
deleted the
reinstate-css.properties.display.contents.focusa/kmwprxvqopkn
branch
September 17, 2026 17:50
ddbeck
added a commit
to ddbeck/web-features
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 30, 2026
ddbeck
added a commit
to web-platform-dx/web-features
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 30, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
This key reflects a serious accessibility fault in
display: contentsand it's necessary to compute a legible status in web-features.Test results and supporting details
Partial revert for 356b204.
Previously, in #24766, we discussed why we created this unimplemented feature in the first place. There's a lengthy description of why we did this and the possible alternatives we rejected.
Related issues
display: contentselements #24766