- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 05:44:18 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I think we need to separate the discussion of scoped styles as a concept from the specifics of the `scoped` attribute on a `<style>` element. There are other syntaxes that could be used (an @-rule, maybe?) that could serve the same goal with different side effects and fallback behavior. > If memory serves me, it was the vendors that pushed back on the spec initially. Maybe we need to revisit their concerns and see what can be done to mitigate them as a start? I fully support this strategy. Can anyone outline specifically why decisions were made to not implement the `scoped` attribute? For me, the major issue was progressive enhancement. I couldn't accept the fallback behavior to be the scoped styles applying to the entire document—although this is really only an issue when the scoped styles are in the markup, since you can always test for attribute support in JS. But maybe there were other reasons from a browser performance perspective? I'd like to think that by rolling this back to the underlying needs and concerns, we can come up with a different syntax that addresses the needs without the same concerns. -- GitHub Notification of comment by AmeliaBR Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3547#issuecomment-458005278 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 28 January 2019 05:44:20 UTC