W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2013

RE: [css-regions] Changed @region rule to ::region() pseudo-element

From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 16:02:02 +0200
Message-ID: <DUB120-W42CE32270563066C77F57BA5AF0@phx.gbl>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: Hċkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
>> ::region(>strong) {
>> abc: def;
>> abc: def;
>> @where :hover {
>> abc: def;
>> abc: def;
>> }
>> }
>
> I take this to mean '::region(>strong) :hover'. But how to do the embedding for '::region(>strong):hover' or '::region(>strong :hover)' or '::region(>strong:hover)'? The @rule didn't suffer this lack of clarity.

You're right. I noted this issue before, but didn't notice it impaired nesting.

So, if we want a pseudo element and justify this with nesting possibilities, we will need a pseudo-element without the parentheses (ie: a combinator-like pseudo-element), or we should use a true combinator or an at-rule instead.


The advantage of the combinator is that you can use both the independent and grouped syntaxes:

   my-region ... region-content {}
   my-region ... region-content-2 {}

and

   my-region { 
      @then ... region-content {}
      @then ... region-content-2 {}
   }

and

   my-region {
      @then {
          region-content {}
          region-content-2 {}
      }
   }

while with @region you are forced to use the second alternative

   @region my-region {
     :scope region-content {}
     :scope region-content-2 {}
   }

(note that it may be seen as an advantage by some) 		 	   		  
Received on Monday, 20 May 2013 14:02:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:30 UTC