Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-scoping] Clarify that ::before/etc allowed after ::slotted()

The CSS Working Group just discussed `Clarify that ::before/etc allowed after ::slotted()`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: allow ::before/after after ::slotted() but not opening it to general stacking of elements`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Clarify that ::before/etc allowed after ::slotted()<br>
&lt;dael> github topic: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1747<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: It's raised by TabAtkins. Anyone else know this topic?<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: I don't think I've seen ::slotted() before.<br>
&lt;dael> gregwhitworth: I think we should wait for TabAtkins. I think their impl is the furthest along.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> I can call now, one sec<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: I think...issue seems straightforward. There's ::slotted pseudo element. They want to attach ::before/after and what's the syntax for that. Obvious is TabAtkins suggestion. I think we just need confirmation from WG this is acceptable.<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: It's only syntax? I thought it was if it was even possible.<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: If it's only syntax this is easier.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: I'm here now.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Simply, is everyone else okay with allowing this syntax. shotted lets a shador dom element select whatever light dom was. There is a real element being pointed to by the pseudo element. So should we allow structural pseudos on that element. Should you be able to modify before and after from the slotted psuedo.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: It's fine from an impl perspective. afaict it's not problem and it's not a problem from spec side. I need wg sign off and then a small change to selectors grammar to allow it.<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: Now it makes sense to me.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Syntax change makes sense. If you should be allowed to access is seperate question. Is slotted how light dom accesses shadow?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: No. Other way around. slotted accesses light dom.<br>
&lt;dael> myles: This isn't arbitrary, just these two.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: slotted with before and after only. We can look at futher combos later.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: We're doing this similar with psuedo classes on pseudo elements. Currently only this set is allowed and all others are disallwed unless explicitly specified.<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: So slotted is a special kind of psuedo element.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Yeah. Special part is is refers to a real element in to dom that's not accessible by standard combinators.<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: Have you thought about other syntaxes that avoid stacking?<br>
&lt;Bert> q?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: We've tried. We talked about the deep combinator taking elements. It ends up awk. IN general these to act like pseudo elements. They just happen to be back by a real element that's not normally accessible.<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: I'm ready to propose allow ::before/after after ::slotted() but not opening it to general stacking of elements.<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: Any support or arguments against?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: allow ::before/after after ::slotted() but not opening it to general stacking of elements<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: TabAtkins you're making the changes?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Yeah.<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: That's the agenda. Other things to discuss?<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: Hearing nothing, thanks everybody!<br>
&lt;dael> Bert: Next week astearns or Rossen will be back.<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1747#issuecomment-324446664 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 23 August 2017 20:04:08 UTC