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 LillesveenReceived on Friday, 6 February 2015 09:12:23 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:51 UTC