Re: [css-scoping] Shadow Cascading

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hmm, you're right, this isn't very stable.  If you remove #3, it
> completely changes the ordering, so that #2 sorts ahead of #1, rather
> than at the end.  The ordering of any two declarations shouldn't be
> affected by the presence or absence of other declarations.
>
> We should fix this up somehow to make things work better.  It probably
> means adding some special cascade behavior for ::content?

I don't have experience in making real web components.

I don't know the rationale for handling re-distribution to shadow tree
siblings differently from distribution to shadow trees for other
hosts.

If specificity should beat ordering for redistribution and ::content
through different hosts, like the spec says now, why isn't that what
you want for re-distribution through shadow tree siblings as well?

-- 
Rune Lillesveen