- From: Joey Arhar via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 16:28:33 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Just curious - is there a reason this was split from https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9284? If it was just to reset the conversation given a more stable design from HTML/OpenUI, should we close https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9284? Yeah I think we can close https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9284 in favor of this. > it avoids the need to answer questions about mutation events and the like (I think those are censored by shadows? especially UA shadows?) We could just disable mutation events during the scope of this DOM copying. We are trying to disable mutation events entirely anyway, so disabling them in this case sounds very reasonable to me. Another question I have if we go with option 2: The pseudo-element would have to target the ShadowRoot node in order to access all of its children independently. Is it possible to have a pseudo-element map to a ShadowRoot node which is technically not an element? -- GitHub Notification of comment by josepharhar Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10242#issuecomment-2085880005 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2024 16:28:34 UTC