Re: Shadow DOM: Hat and Cat -- if that's your real name. from Brian Kardell on 2014-02-04 (www-style@w3.org from February 2014)

From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:02:37 -0500
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Cc: Blake Kaplan <mrbkap@gmail.com>, William Chen <wchen@mozilla.com>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>, Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Message-ID: <CADC=+jdSgV3=1kJuaoYre+Qm07a_nEVh3LZF7uR74AjTgQ09wg@mail.gmail.com>

On Feb 4, 2014 5:34 AM, "Florian Rivoal" <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 02:26:52 -0800, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
wrote:
>
>>> As I understand the problem, the group is just looking for better names.
>>> Surely we can find the right terms.
>>
>>
>> A suggestion for ::shadow and ::shadow-all came out of discussing this
on IRC.
>>
>> In any case, please do not ship combinators, ignoring the request to use
named pseudo-elements instead, just because we don't agree on names within
days' notice.
>
>
>
> +1 on these 2 names
>
> - Florian
>

::shadow-all is ok i guess, but "all".. But... is there not something
slightly more descriptive of the nested nature like ::shadow-deep or
::shadow-pierce even just ::shadows or something?

Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2014 16:03:10 UTC