W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [shadowdom] specificity of ::distributed()

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:39:56 -0700
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD9472B1.28DA9%stearns@adobe.com>
On 4/17/13 3:20 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> I found myself wondering about ::distributed() specificity today. Do
>>both
>> sides contribute somehow? I think these are all valid uses of
>> ::distributed(), and if they all match the same element it would be
>>useful
>> to know which of these wins out over the others:
>>
>> 1 - ::distributed(#id)
>> 2 - ::distributed(.class)
>> 3 - #id::distributed(#id)
>> 4 - .class::distributed(#id)
>
>I think it should be a pass-through, so that the specificities are:
>
>1. (1,0,0)
>2. (0,1,0)
>3. (2,0,0)
>4. (1,1,0)

Makes sense to me.

Thanks,

Alan
Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2013 22:40:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 17 April 2013 22:40:26 UTC