- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 21:14:33 -0500
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 2/6/14 9:03 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > With this, either "foo ^ bar" still works, or it doesn't. If it > doesn't work, then there's no way to opt it into working on your own. I agree that the ^ combinator, as designed, cannot be built on a type 2 model, though. That's what Maciej was talking about when he said the design of ^ and ^^ was fundamentally incompatible with type 2: you can't build them on top of it, and if you allow them to work (at least in querySelector) then you can't have type 2 encapsulation... > You have to add a brand-new explicit switch in the magic side of the > API that makes the shadow tree "open", presumably for both JS and CSS. That's basically the "I want type 1, not type 2" switch. > You may recognize this as the *exact inverse* of what we've talked > about for building Type 2 on top of Type 1 (having a switch that > closes off a shadow root, so we can then selectively expose things to > CSS via some other method). So that would mean shutting off ^ and ^^ as well, yes? > and need an additional primitive to really switch between them. Is this something worth trying to design at this juncture? It's not entirely clear easy that would be... > (This can probably be chalked up to the fact that CSS is fairly hostile to > polyfills, unlike almost all of JS.) A great boon for CSS in some ways, for it allows much more interesting and parallelizable implementation strategies. ;) But yes, a bit of a PITA if you want to transparently extend it. -Boris
Received on Friday, 7 February 2014 02:15:04 UTC