- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 13:32:35 -0700
- To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote: > On Aug 21, 2012 4:03 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote: >>> Meh. I think this loses most of the "CSS is so much more convenient" >>> benefits. It's mainly the fact that you don't have to worry about >>> whether >>> the nodes exist yet that makes CSS more convenient. >> >> Note that this benefit is preserved. Moving or inserting an element >> in the DOM should apply CAS to it. >> >> The only thing we're really losing in the dynamic-ness is that other >> types of mutations to the DOM don't change what CAS does, and some of >> the dynamic selectors like :hover don't do anything. >> > > So if I had a selector .foo .bar and then some script inserted a .bar inside > a .foo - that would work... but if I added a .bar class to some existing > child of .foo it would not...is that right? Correct. If we applied CAS on attribute changes, we'd have... problems. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 20:33:23 UTC