- From: Martin Janecke via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:22:23 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@tabatkins, in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/137#issuecomment-222031438 you said scoped styles would be “basically equivalent to just putting an ID on the container and using that in every rule”. That may not be really true as discussed further down in that thread, but if a simpler version of scoped styles would actually be equivalent to just that, than this would be a huge help with real use cases already and I don’t see why “just putting an ID on the container and using that in every rule” should be too much code complexity for browsers. Let’s just define ``` @prepend foo { bar, baz { … } @prepend qux { dang { … } } } ``` to be equivalent to ``` foo bar, foo baz { … } foo qux dang { … } ``` To me, this seems to be just about syntactic sugar in CSS – but really, really sweet one that solves real problems. It doesn’t need more than that to prevent leaks in one direction, if `foo` is a unique ID. You don’t have to change anything about how CSS works in the background, you don’t need to touch specifity. Just treat the former code as if it were the latter. For preventing leaks in both directions, you can require JavaScript and have all the complexity of shadow DOM for styles to work as desired, if that’s what many other developers want. I don’t bother. -- GitHub Notification of comment by prlbr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/270#issuecomment-231999279 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 12 July 2016 10:22:36 UTC