Re: Question regarding the "all" property

Thanks, yeah, I've been following the shadow dom and I'm very excited about
its potential for real style encapsulation.


On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Philip Walton <philip@philipwalton.com>
> wrote:
> > I'm writing about the new "all" property and I just wanted to make sure
> I'm
> > factually correct on a few points:
> >
> > "all" is just a regular CSS property and all the normal specificity
> rules of
> > the cascade apply, correct?
> >
> > That means that if I've done something like:
> >
> > #sidebar > div { background: red; }
> >
> > Then the following rule, if applied to a <div> in the sidebar will not
> > override the previous background definition.
> >
> > .widget { all: default; }
> >
> > If so, that implies that the all property cannot be used to achieve true
> > encapsulation, it's just a simple way for authors to undo what they've
> > already done (no judgment either way, just checking).
> >
> > Am I'm understanding this correctly?
>
> Yes.  It's just a normal shorthand property, exactly the same as
> 'background' or 'transition' or 'border'.  It just happens to
> shorthand *all* of the properties, rather than a subset.
>
> (For context, since Ms2ger just asked about this in another channel,
> the 'all' property was recently added to the Cascade module:
> <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-cascade/#all-shorthand>.)
>
> Stronger encapsulation requires more powerful concepts than we can get
> with just the cascade, and probably coordination with other
> technologies.  Luckily, precisely that already exists - the Web
> Components spec, which is being implemented in multiple browsers, is
> designed explicitly for this kind of thing, so you can write a widget
> and "hide" its DOM inside of a "shadow", which can't be targeted by
> the outer page's CSS at all unless the component author allows it.
>
> ~TJ
>