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

Re: [css-regions] ::region() or ::fragment() pseudo-element

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:13:06 -0700
Message-Id: <ED36172F-70FC-43F3-9905-D99AA2F786E5@gmail.com>
Cc: W3C WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>, Tab Atkins <jackalmage@gmail.com>
To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
On Jun 14, 2013, at 2:51 PM, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:

> That's my point. I don't think that the change to ::fragment lets us use
> future grouping solutions. All of the grouping examples I've seen (and the
> Hierarchies proposal) split similar selectors and create a group out of
> the left side of the split. So if you have the current region styling
> syntax:
> 
> <region-selector>::region(<content-selector-A>) {}
> <region-selector>::region(<content-selector-B>) {}
> 
> 
> Then you could use a left-side grouping mechanism to do what we want,
> which is define a set of region styles for a particular region:
> 
> Group<region-selector>
> {
>  ::region(<content-selector-A>) {}
>  ::region(<content-selector-B>) {}
> }

That would likely select regions that were descendants of the <region-selector>.

It might be better than the other pseudo-element option, but it still looks pretty bad to me. Instead of just writing something like this:

@region #myregion {
p {}
img {}
h3 {}
h4 {}
}

...which is clean and clear, I have to write something that is still much more cumbersome, and less readable: 

group #myregion {
::scope::region(p) {}
::scope::region(img) {}
::scope::region(h3) {}
::scope::region(h4) {}
}
Received on Friday, 14 June 2013 22:13:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:12 UTC