Popover: note still talks about anchor attribute

[annevk]

@josepharhar @mfreed7 can you take a look at this note? I'm not sure how to accurately reword it.

This eliminates non-showing popovers and self-pointers (e.g. a popover with an anchor attribute that points back to the same popover), and it allows for the construction of a well-formed tree from the (possibly cyclic) graph of connections.

(You can have self-pointers with popovertarget, but I suspect this is about something else.)

[mfreed7]

This eliminates non-showing popovers and self-pointers (e.g. a popover with an anchor attribute that points back to the same popover), and it allows for the construction of a well-formed tree from the (possibly cyclic) graph of connections.

How about this:

This eliminates non-showing popovers and self-pointers (e.g. a popover containing an invoking element that points back to the containing popover), and it allows for the construction of a well-formed tree from the (possibly cyclic) graph of connections.

[annevk]

So that means <div id=x popover><button popovertarget=x popover>blah</button></div>, right? Because <button id=x popovertarget=x popover>blah</button> works.

[mfreed7]

Or even just <div id=x popover><button popovertarget=x></button></div>. I.e. the button doesn't have to be a popover.

[annevk]

Okay, I think that works then.

[annevk]

@mfreed7 are you planning on writing a PR for this?

[mfreed7]

@josepharhar is working on a PR to add back the anchor attribute, to work with the CSS Anchor Positioning spec. Perhaps he can modify this note (or not?) as part of that PR?

If not, @josepharhar mind just changing the note in the meantime? See the suggested text.