- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2013 16:18:54 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22892
--- Comment #3 from Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org> ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Consider this situation:
> >
> > <style> p { color: green; }
> > <div id="foo">
> > <style scoped>
> > p { color: red; }
> > </style>
> > </div>
> > <script>
> > var root = document.querySelector('#foo').createShadowRoot();
> > root.innerHTML = "<content></content><p>What color am I?</p>
> > </script>
> >
> > My intuition tells me that we should simply disallow these shenanigans, and
> > the color of p is green. In other words, a scoped style that is a child of a
> > shadow host does not do anything.
>
> What's the effect of a scoped stylesheet in the shadow root itself? That
> still works, right?
Depends on what we deem the effect of "shadowing a DOM tree" to be to styling.
What would be the most logical thing to do here from CSS perspecive?
> Have we fully clarified whether <content> is *replaced* by its matched light
> DOM, or just *filled* with it (and then doesn't render, via magic like
> "box:contents")?
Nope, not yet. If it helps to sway in either direction, this is all flexible.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 6 August 2013 16:18:56 UTC