- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 11:58:09 +0100
- To: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014 23:30:36 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> > wrote: >> We've never really decided how name-creating at-rules, like @font-face >> or @counter-style, behave in a scoped style sheet. Shadow trees >> present an identical problem. We should nail this down now. >> >> I see a few options: >> >> 1. They craete their name globally (no scoping effect at all). >> 2. They create their name only within the scope. >> 3. They don't create any names.. >> 4. They don't create any names by default, but when nested in an >> @global rule, they create their name globally. >> >> Any other options? What do people think is the best answer? >> >> I think we can rule out #3 immediately, by the way. Early experience >> with Shadow DOM shows that people want to use @font-face with their >> components, and it's annoying to force pages to include a separate >> <link> just for a stylesheet with @font-face rules in it; it's much >> better to put the @font-face in the component's styles with everything >> else. >> >> I think #2 is fairly obviously the "best" answer, but it's hard to >> implement. > > Nobody else has any opinions? If not, we should go with #1 and settle > it in a spec. I think #1 or #4 are OK. If we go with #1, does that mean that @global should be dropped? (It's in the HTML spec IIRC.) -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2014 10:58:40 UTC