W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > September 2011

[whatwg] Selectors within <style scoped>

From: Roland Steiner <rolandsteiner@google.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:33:48 +0900
Message-ID: <CACFPSph21yBwHcvaxmBj6AJu733+mtvfpwqa-7dS0_qp4cLkqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hm, AFAICT Hixie's mail on www-style@ didn't raise any objections against
the idea itself, the discussion just revolves around what the exact syntax
should be. Given that, what is the chance that we are able to go forward and
declare selectors within <style scoped> as scoped, and leave the question
how such selectors can "breach" the scoping as an orthogonal problem?


Cheers,

- Roland

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Roland Steiner <rolandsteiner at google.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
>
>> [...]
>
> However, as easy as that appears at first blush, I fear it would be seem
>> quite magical to authors who have trouble enough understanding CSS as it
>> is. Consider:
>>
>>   <aside>
>>    <section>
>>     <style scoped>
>>      aside section h1 { ... } /* matches nothing */
>>      aside section:scope h1 { ... } /* matches h1 below */
>>     </style>
>>     <h1>Example</h1>
>>     ...
>>    </section>
>>   </aside>
>>
>> Never before in CSS has making a selector more specific actually increased
>> the number of elements it can match.
>
>
> That is a very good point!
>
>
> With :root doing the magic, you're really using :root as an @-rule; you
>> might as well at that point actually do so:
>>
>>     <style scoped>
>>      section > h1 { border-bottom: solid; }
>>      @global body.homepage h1 { color: red; }
>>      @global body.archive h1 { color: gray; }
>>     </style>
>>
>> This does have the advantage of meaning there's no magic. Where do
>> implementors stand on this? Are @rules an acceptable solution? (If so,
>> we'd want to pass it by the CSSWG first.)
>>
>
> On first glance (without having looked at code and potential interactions
> of @-rules) "@global" really seems much nicer, esp. for the above given
> reason. It's also visually easier to parse, IMHO.
>
> It would also make a nice parallel with the proposed queryScopedSelector
> when explaining all of this to authors: @global -> querySelector, no @global
> -> queryScopedSelector.
>
>
> - Roland
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2011 22:33:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:36 UTC