[Bug 22344] [Shadow]: Distribute into <shadow>, project into older shadow root

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22344

--- Comment #39 from Scott Miles <sjmiles@chromium.org> ---
Sorry I didn't explain myself very well, thank you for your patience.

Take this example from your post:

     <content select=".deco1"></content>
     <shadow><content select=":not(.deco2)"></content></shadow>
     <content select=".deco2"></content>

As you say, we cannot use :not, so this is no good. 

But, if we write this:

     <content select=".deco1"></content>
     <div><content select=":not(.deco2)"></content></div>
     <content select=".deco2"></content>

or this

     <content id=a select=".deco1"></content>
     <x-foo><content select=":not(.deco2)"></content><x-foo>
     <content id=c select=".deco2"></content>

neither of those cases work either for the same reason.

Providing a "leftovers" convention for no-content <shadow> solves the first
case, but doesn't help either of the other cases. To my mind, that suggests
it's not worth the cost of being special.

Today, what we say is that you must do this:

     <content id=a select=".deco1"></content>
     <content id=c select=".deco2"></content>
     <content></content>

And use CSS if you need rearrange the nodes for presentation.

As I mentioned, we could invent a special "leftovers" selector, then we could
do something like this:

     <content select=".deco1"></content>
     <content select="!leftovers!"></content>
     <content select=".deco2"></content>

and that would solve all three cases.

However, there are similar cases that require ordering that are not rescued by
a "leftovers" semantic, e.g.:

     <content select=".deco"></content>
     <content select="span"></content>

If there are some spans that have .deco then the ordering of nodes is again
relevant and we must use CSS to re-arrange for presentation.

I hope that's a bit clearer? Thanks for all your work on these issues!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Thursday, 7 November 2013 06:22:27 UTC