W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2014

Re: [shadow-styling] Scoping at-rules like @font-face in scoped styled and shadow trees?

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:30:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDC+v=PVMXh77jWVpAfnZ3cbqUSPXzn=xfGktkgF5nrQHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> We've never really decided how name-creating at-rules, like @font-face
> or @counter-style, behave in a scoped style sheet.  Shadow trees
> present an identical problem.  We should nail this down now.
>
> I see a few options:
>
> 1. They craete their name globally (no scoping effect at all).
> 2. They create their name only within the scope.
> 3. They don't create any names..
> 4. They don't create any names by default, but when nested in an
> @global rule, they create their name globally.
>
> Any other options?  What do people think is the best answer?
>
> I think we can rule out #3 immediately, by the way.  Early experience
> with Shadow DOM shows that people want to use @font-face with their
> components, and it's annoying to force pages to include a separate
> <link> just for a stylesheet with @font-face rules in it; it's much
> better to put the @font-face in the component's styles with everything
> else.
>
> I think #2 is fairly obviously the "best" answer, but it's hard to implement.

Nobody else has any opinions?  If not, we should go with #1 and settle
it in a spec.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2014 22:31:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 25 February 2014 22:31:24 UTC