Re: [csswg-drafts] `::details-content` vs `details::part(content)` (#9951)

I consider `::details-content` the only viable option.

Rationale:

1. `::part()` is a web developer namespace. This would be akin to standardizing `data-*` attributes. While it is true we are not taking away names web developers can use, it is still utterly confusing.
2. It create an inconsistent API with `::placeholder`, `::marker`, `::file-selector-button`, `::thumb`/`::slider-thumb`, etc.
3. `::part()` is very much tied to open/closed shadow trees. For built-in elements the way they work should remain up to implementations, even if we decide to define their subtree in terms of internal shadow trees (not open/closed) in the specification. Using `::part()` however deviates from that as that's specific syntax tied to open/closed shadow trees. I'm very much opposed to start exposing implementation details.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by annevk
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9951#issuecomment-1985192804 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Friday, 8 March 2024 07:35:46 UTC