W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2015

Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 07:54:40 -0800
Message-ID: <CADh5Ky04k0=98QE+-hw1BZXfkamKjzRr43GTyO_qp5o33CDweQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Tab Atkins <tabatkins@google.com>
For the record, I am a huge fan of exploring this. I tried a couple of
times, but was unable to extract this primitive from Shadow DOM in a clean
way. I talked with Tab late last year about restarting this effort, so this
is timely.


On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For clarity, are you suggesting you'd control the matching boundary via
> > somehow or you'd need an indicator in the tree?  A new element/attribute
> or
> > something like a "fragment root" (sort of a shadowroot-lite)?
> I wasn't suggesting anything since I'm not sure what the best way
> would be. It has to be some flag that eventually ends up on an element
> so when you do selector matching you know what subtrees to ignore. If
> you set that flag through a CSS property you'd get circular
> dependencies, but perhaps that can be avoided somehow. Setting it
> through an element or attribute would violate separation of style and
> markup.
> --
> https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 9 January 2015 15:55:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:47 UTC