- From: Roland Steiner <rolandsteiner@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:36:54 +0900
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Roland Steiner <rolandsteiner at google.com>wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky at mit.edu> wrote: > >> On 6/17/11 1:39 AM, Roland Steiner wrote: >> >>> Having another scoped stylesheet under an element further up. >>> >> >> Why does that matter for the way rules in _this_ sheet are treated? >> > > http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/#the-scope-pseudo-class says: > > The :scope <http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/#scope> > pseudo-class *must* match any element that is a contextual reference > element<http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/#contextual-reference-element> > . > > so :scope is ambiguous if you have several scoping elements as ancestors. > :scope in a nested sheet, meant to limit the rule to the nested scoping > element, may instead match against an enclosing scoping element. Again, see > the example I mailed earlier. > Actually, re-reading that section I think I misunderstood the meaning. If only the direct parent of a <style scoped> is considered a contextual reference element for rules in _that_ style-sheet (rather than an element being a contextual reference element for _some_ scoped stylesheet), there is no ambiguity. So please disregard my ramblings. - Roland
Received on Friday, 17 June 2011 00:36:54 UTC