- From: Chris Eppstein via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:56:08 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> I mean, not only does the namespace prop get hairy
@matthew-dean I agree. I think better syntax and behavior around concatenated stylesheets could be arrived at.
> but the xml-style namespacing is extremely limited
I don't see how it's limited. You indicated that this is more flexible:
```html
<div scope="all and (foo, bar)">
```
But my proposal could allow this by declaring that the existing `:scope` selector matches the namespaced class attribute with an empty/non-present value of `""`. For example:
```css
@namespace local(button) {
:scope {
/* styles for the button element */
}
}
```
```html
<button buttons:class>
```
More complex scoping of descendant elements could accomplish this by combinating with `:scope`.
> and this form doesn't allow multiple inheritance (or exclusions).
We can certainly add syntax for importing and extending namespaces within CSS.
> It also clashes with xml namespacing, does it not?
It doesn't clash with xml namespacing... it is using xml namespacing. That's why I think my proposal is "simple"... it builds on existing primitives already in browsers.
I don't see how your proposed syntax avoids namespace collisions, which is a major goal of this proposal.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by chriseppstein
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4061#issuecomment-524984784 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 26 August 2019 18:56:10 UTC