- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:06:21 -0700
- To: Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.net>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Joshua Cranmer wrote:
>
> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> I agree here, though, that *without* a :scope or :context pseudoclass,
>> it can be difficult to achieve proper modularity. Frex, in this
>> fragment:
>>
>> <section>
>> <style scoped>
>> div span { color: red }
>> </style>
>> <span>span content</span>
>> <div>
>> <span>some more span content</span>
>> </div>
>> </section>
>>
>> The second span will definitely be red, but the first will be red
>> depending on whether or not there is a div somewhere further up the
>> ancestor chain.
>>
> This sounds as if it's a bug. As developer, I would intuitively
> expect such a document fragment to have the same results regardless of
> extra content. Whether or not the section is wrapped in a div or not
> should not (IMHO) affect the styles generated by the scoped
> stylesheets. I fail to see a compelling use case that calls for the
> scoped stylesheets to be knowledgeable of the existence of any
> elements outside the scoped root (e.g., the section).
>
Exactly.
That is the question: Is it the scope or is it sort of environmental
scope - "global-scope-but-limited-by-local-set".
I can imagine people trying to comprehend that.
--
Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Monday, 14 July 2008 22:07:12 UTC