W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2011

Re: <style scoped>: matching the scoping element and :first-child et al

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 08:39:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCH+-hQa0i6+tb1that8vrm5n6btVxHNubFUvBP8aAMMg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roland Steiner <rolandsteiner@chromium.org>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, Dominic Cooney <dominicc@google.com>
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Roland Steiner
<rolandsteiner@chromium.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As I am implementing the new version of <style scoped> I came across another
> edge case question:
>
> In the upcoming version, a selector matches up to, and including, the
> scoping element (i.e., the parent element of <style scoped>). Now, how
> should pseudo-classes be handled on selectors that match the scoping
> element? E.g.
>
> <div>
>     <div>...</div>
>     <div>
>         <style scoped>
>             div:first-child { ... }
>             div:first-of-type {  ... }
>             div:nth-child(2) { ... }
>             div:nth-of-type(2) { ... }
>             div:last-child { ... }
>             div:last-of-type { ... }
>             div:nth-last-child(2) { ... }
>             div:nth-last-of-type(2) { ... }
>         </style>
>     </div>
>     <div>...</div>
> <div>
>
> On one hand, 'div:first-child' et al still only match the scoping <div>
> element, and thus should be applicable. OTOH, the pseudo-classes draw
> information from outside the sub-tree. I personally slightly tend towards
> allowing it, but could easily be swayed by good arguments otherwise.
>
> What do others think?

Definitely allow it.  It's not only good sense (to me), but it also
keeps with the design principle that scoping should generally be
similar to just appending an id to all the selectors.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 9 December 2011 16:40:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:47 GMT