- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 08:49:27 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
frivoal has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [selectors-4] confilct between HTML :focus and CSS :focus == https://drafts.csswg.org/selectors-4/#the-focus-pseudo On Aug 20, 2015, at 13:50, @fantasai said in a mail > Heya Florian, > I was just reviewing > https://hg.csswg.org/drafts/rev/2539f118cb22 Hello, this is zombie email waking up from the dead. > I'm not sure if the conformance clause is on the host language spec or directly on UAs. This needs to be clearer. If it's on the host language, then it should probably be a should and not a must. And if it's directly on UAs, then we've probably got a clash with HTML. In which case we should be clearer about the fact that our spec is asking to override the HTML spec. It is meant to be a requirement on the UA. The Resolution for doing that is here https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Nov/0553.html The main intent was to have propagation from/to the label just like :active does, it was felt more elegant to do it by saying that :focus propagates the same as :active (except to parents), and that :focus-within would be the same as :focus, plus parents. However, this assumes there's not compat issue in propagating :focus the same way :active propagates, but there seems to be some: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Nov/0292.html Somehow that mail predates the resolution, and yet we didn't take it into account. Oops. So, what do we do? 1. Try to amend HTML on the hope that the compat problems are small enough. I doubt this will be successful, based on @zcorpan’s investigation quoted above. Even if we do, we probably need to find some other hook than “the same as `:active` except parents”, as the HTML spec text for that doesn't seem to me to generalize well to things other than `:active` https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/scripting.html#selector-active 2. remove propagation of `:focus` and keep `:focus-within` = `:focus` + parents This would preserve the main motivation for `:focus-within` (matching ancestors), but as we'd loose propagation to/from labels, which was judged desirable as well, and does not have a compat problem. 3. Remove propagation of `:focus` and redefine propagation of `:focus-within` to/from labels some other way That seems the best to me, but any idea how to phrase that? As I said above, the phrasing for :active in the HTML spec doesn't generalize well. ---- Mentioning the people who were involved in the original discussion: @tabatkins @tantek @zcorpan @fantasai Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/789 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 5 December 2016 08:49:42 UTC