- From: Arno Gourdol <agourdol@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 16:09:04 -0700
- To: Brady Duga <duga@ljug.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
> OK, I see now. Might want to clarify that.
Will do.
> What happens if scripting removes an element that caused the match in the first place? So:
>
> h1+p::slot() { ... }
>
> With content:
>
> [...]
> <h1>A heading</h1>
> <p>A paragraph</p>
> [...]
>
> And the h1 is removed? Would the resulting slot be removed?
I would think not. This does mean that there is no mechanism to remove slots once they've been created.
> The more I read it, the more concerned I am about this "selection is creation" mechanic. How is order of creation specified, by appearance order in the document, specificity, or something else?
Probably by appearance in order of the document.
> How do you reference a slot that already exists?
Using the "%slot" notation.
> guess it just makes me uneasy. Did that come up at the f2f?
I believe that what we have in the current proposal is along the lines of what was suggested at the f2f. An alternative would be to use an @ notation to specify slots. We're open to other suggestions as well.
> I'm sorry to say I am a little late to reviewing this as proposed to the CSS WG.
Not at all. There is still time to give feedback and for us to incorporate it.
– Arno ❉ @arnog ❉ Director of Engineering, Runtime Foundation
Received on Friday, 25 March 2011 23:09:37 UTC