- From: Hayato Ito <hayato@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:44:30 +0900
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
The subject was changed. On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com> wrote: >> Using scope-relative approach (which I love), what does >> ::distributed(:scope) represent? > > Nothing. The scope element is a theoretical construct here > representing a container for all the distributed elements, not a real > element that you can do something with. I am now implementing relative selectors in blink. As the first usecase of relative selectors, I've tried to use it in '::distributed(..)' pseudo elements. Now I have a question. Let me use the following deduction: 1). content::distributed(> .hello) -> Please assume this matches. 2). content::distributed(:scope > .hello) -> Matches. (1 and 2 should be equivalent acccording to the defintion of relative selectors). 3). content::distributed(*:scope > .hello) -> Matches. 4). content::distributed(content:scope > .hello) -> Matches. 5). content::distributed(content > .hello) -> Should not match. It seems 4) and 5) violates the principle of pseudo class, doesn't it? There is a something wrong in between 1 and 5. That's between1 and 2, isn't it? -- Hayato
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 08:45:17 UTC