- From: Jake Archibald via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 19:15:42 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@mirisuzanne > I'm also interested in the structure being represented. I know one of the alternatives we discussed at TPAC involved some sort of 'pseudo-element descendant combinators' to make that structure more clear Yeah, I've got a whole other doc on that with all the options that I'd love your opinion on. I'm waiting on @emilio to review it first, because I want to make sure I've represented the shadow DOM pattern correctly & fairly. > I think that the resulting pseudo-element tree is: > > ``` > ::view-root > ├ ::view(custom-ident) > | └─ ::view-image-group(custom-ident) > | ├─ ::view-before(custom-ident) > | └─ ::view-after(custom-ident) > └ ::view(different-ident) > └─ ::view-image-group(different-ident) > ├─ ::view-before(different-ident) > └─ ::view-after(different-ident) > ``` Yep, that's correct > I kinda like `start` and `end`, since we already have `before` and `after` pseudos that mean something pretty different. But I don't feel strongly. Hmm, `start` and `end` feel layout-positional to me (from `align-content` and co). I get what you mean about `::before` and `::after` though. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jakearchibald Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7788#issuecomment-1258497839 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 26 September 2022 19:15:44 UTC