W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > March 2018

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-shadow-parts] decide on forwarding micro-syntax for partmap

From: fergald via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:36:22 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-376073175-1522049781-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The concrete use case that I can think of is migrating to a new part-name interface and implementing both the old and the new interface for as long as needed, e.g.

<c-e1 partmap="a => b, a => c">
  #shadow
  <c-e2>
    <e1 part="a"></e1>
  </c-e2>
</c-e1>

c-e1/ce-2/a can be styled using the old naming scheme "b" and also the new naming scheme, "c"

While I'm at it, my instinctual interpretation of "a=>b, a =>c" is really that .c-e1::part(a) would match against
some inner parts b and c. The fact that it goes the opposite direction keeps surprising me. If we reversed them then "a=>b, a=>c" would signify grouping 2 inner parts under the same name which seems like a more common operation that might be more worth shortening to "a => b c".



-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by fergald
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2411#issuecomment-376073175 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 26 March 2018 07:36:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:26 UTC