- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 09:50:54 -0700
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote: > Le 20/09/11 00:58, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit : > >> Reasoning >> --------- >> The #2 meaning of "scoped" appears to be more intuitive to authors, >> and appears to be more commonly used. > > More "commonly used"? I'd like to know how many mainstream web sites > use scoped stylesheets! I suspect "negligible for the time being". I gave several examples of scoped selectors other than <style scoped>, such as querySelector/queryScopedSelector and jQuery. Roland provides the further example of manually-done "scoping" via prefixing with a selector for the "scope root". On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote: > Le 20/09/11 00:58, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit : >> Summary >> ------- >> HTML is defining<style scoped> in a way which best matches author >> intuitions, but which is limited in some ways. I propose @global as a >> way to get around those limitations while maintaining the >> intuitiveness benefits. Hixie wrote an email explaining the relevant >> reasoning and suggesting this proposal at >> >> <http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-September/033222.html>. > > I read this proposal twice already and I still don't get it... > I'll give it a third try but honestly, I don't understand it, > don't get the rationale behind it, don't get the use case. Unfortunately, I don't know what to say. I thought I explained it quite clearly. There are two possible models of scoping. Both have strengths and weaknesses. One is more intuitive, so we'd like to make <style scoped> use it. I'm proposing @global to address the weakness of that scoping model. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 20 September 2011 16:51:47 UTC