- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 01:14:20 -0500
- To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDqkmRHbzEpptCxwpPRTxAOrNsvyVXgNtpq7ePG5r-hFw@mail.gmail.com>
On Jul 16, 2013 1:06 AM, "François REMY" <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote: > > ± The Shadow DOM pseudos have already switched to this (the spec may not > ± have caught up to it, yet), and Alan was planning to switch ::region as well, as > ± soon as Shadow DOM's switch was confirmed and sure. > > Ok, good to know. Was any anouncement made for this? Dunno! > ± > PS: By the way, did someone beside Tab had a look at the {so-called} > ± ":host(selector) pseudo-class" {previously known as the ":context()" pseudo- > ± class}? It seems really crazy to me and not functionally belonging to the > ± "pseudo-class family". If not, please have a look here: > ± > > ± > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22390 > ± > > ± > and start a new thread if you feel the same as me > ± > ± How is it possibly not a pseudo-class? It's an additional filter applied to the > ± host element, based on information not obtainable via normal selectors. > > The problem is that, if I understood it correctly, selectors like ":host(...) *" and "*" may select completely different stuff, in a completely different part of the DOM tree, across several shadow dom entries. I don't think it should be possible to style ancestors of the the shadow dom host, and it seems what this stuff is aimed at. > > What's the reason why we would like to allow to style parents of the shadow dom host from inside, by the way? > > Or did I miss the point? You've missed the point. ^_^ :host() is a proper pseudo class - it just filters elements you can already select normally. Specifically, it matches the host element only if, in the composed ancestor list, the selector argument matches something. It doesn't let you actually select those elements above the host, just match based on them. ":host() *" is definitely different from "*", because the appropriate thing to compare it to is "* *", obviously; as proper, it selects a subset of what is matched by that more general selector within a shadow tree. It doesn't let you style outside of the shadow tree, except for the host element itself. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2013 06:14:47 UTC