- 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