- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 14:27:29 -0700
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- CC: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
On 9/30/13 3:45 PM, "Simon Pieters" <simonp@opera.com> wrote: >On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 17:50:26 +0200, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> >wrote: > >> It seems odd that I can get from an Element to a PseudoElement, but >> there's no way to get back from the PseudoElement to the Element (or >>find >> out which PseudoElement it is). Am I missing something? > >It hasn't beed added yet because none of these points from the end of the > >email below have been met yet, AFAIK: > >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Aug/0453.html I think these steps are a compelling use case, but I admit I'm a bit biased. 1. Get a PseudoElement from NamedFlow.getRegions() 2. Now I want to modify this PseudoElement's style by adding a new style rule with the associated element's ID and this pseudo-element's string. If we change Region to be a standalone interface as I've suggested, then this information is already available to use. If Region is a supplemental interface on PseudoElement, more PseudoElement attributes would be required. > > >> In any case, it's easy enough to say in a spec: >> >> Element implements Region >> PseudoElement implements Region >> >> But the question then is what happens with the NamedFlow.getRegions() >> call, which is intended to return a sequence of Regions. If those >>Regions >> can be either an Element or a PseudoElement, what then? > >You can make the return value sequence<(Region or Element or >PseudoElement)> I'd hope that if Region is a supplemental interface I could spec sequence<Region> without needing to know which future interfaces decided to implement Region. If the above would be required I think that's another argument for a standalone interface. Thanks, Alan
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 21:28:09 UTC