- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:29:44 -0700
- To: Steve Orvell <sorvell@google.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Steve Orvell <sorvell@google.com> wrote: > Let's say an author wants to style all `div`'s within the subtree selected > to a given insertion point. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like this > selector would be required: > > content /content/ div, content /content/ * div { ...} > > This is based on the definition of the /content/ combinator here: > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/shadow-styling/#content-combinator. > > Previously, the ShadowDOM spec defined a pseudo-element ::content for > matching the content element. With this pseudo-element, to write a selector > which matched the same set of elements would have been: > > ::content div { ... } > > This is certainly a win for brevity. > > If it's important to restrict a selector to the set of distributed elements, > you can use the child combinator. In other words, these would be equivalent: > > content /content/ div { ... } > ::content > div { ... } Well, you don't need to specify the "content" beforehand in the first selector. You need *something*, but it can just be "*": * /content/ div {...} ::content > div {...} Things without a distribution list just won't match anything when the combinator is applied. > This makes me think a pseudo-element would be superior for matching > distributed elements. > > Are there other reasons to prefer a combinator? Consistency with the other combinators. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 17 March 2014 21:30:32 UTC