- From: Emilio Cobos Álvarez via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2024 09:19:03 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I agree with @andruud that requiring two styling passes is a no-go. It's also cyclic, even though if you restrict the pseudo-class / at-rule to the UA sheet you can kinda cheat and assume that there's no cycle... What styles do you plan to apply to `<select>` on this case? `<select>` already has default styles that are somewhat reasonable (borders etc) for `appearance: none`. We discussed this with @annevk and @mfreed7 in the context of `<input type=checkbox switch>` too. My preference would be to not do this. Have the default styles be sane and either: * Make `appearance: none` be the "stylable, uses a non-replaced box and thus has pseudo-elements and other goodies" behavior (we can do this for `switch`, but likely not for `<select>`). * Make `appearance: base` create a non-replaced box, and thus render child elements, have pseudo-elements etc. `appearance: none` would still create a replaced box that wouldn't create renderers / layout objects for the pseudo-elements and thus would remain behaving as it is. This has no cycles and is trivialish to implement, but whether this is possible depends on the kind of styling differences that you want to have between `base` and `none` / `auto`. -- GitHub Notification of comment by emilio Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10028#issuecomment-1983062158 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2024 09:19:05 UTC