19681 2012-10-23 22:52:14 +0000 [Shadow]: Refactor styles to get rid of rule applicability 2012-10-31 21:41:26 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WebAppsWG HISTORICAL - Component Model unspecified PC All RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 18428 1 dglazkov dglazkov hayato tasak public-webapps-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 76996 0 dglazkov 2012-10-23 22:52:14 +0000 Rule applicability algorithm is complex and unintuitive. It also has mistakes: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16317#c9 Instead, we should just enumerate constraints. 77009 1 tasak 2012-10-24 02:55:47 +0000 >There is not /select/ attribute on "shadow". Can you explain why we would need something like this? (possibly on a new bug :P) So only shadow reference combinator doesn't work for <shadow>? I'm thinking of something like: <x-A> <template> <style> content /select/ div.special { color: red; } </style> <content> </template> </x-a> <x-B extend="x-A"> <template> <style> shadow /select/ div.special { color: blue; } </style> <shadow> </template> </x-B> So, x-B cannot apply any styles to distributed nodes? If we depend on select attribute, we can add our own fake select attribute to <shadow>. (It doesn't work, but <shadow> can have select.> I'mean: <shadow id="x">... getElementById("x").setAttribute("select", ":first-child"); So, "select" should be used when solving /select/? Best regards, Takashi Sakamoto 77011 2 dglazkov 2012-10-24 03:06:19 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > >There is not /select/ attribute on "shadow". Can you explain why we would need something like this? (possibly on a new bug :P) When I asked for a new bug, I didn't realize you were going to to reuse my other bug for this. I am starting to worry that I am mis-communicating something. I want to keep discussions on bugs focused and easily understood. That's why we have multiple bugs. One issue -- one bug. This bug is about refactoring the styles section to get rid of rule applicability algorithm. I can't figure out how the <shadow> discussion in your comment relates to it. I guess they are all related to styles. But then again, all bugs I've filed are related to Shadow DOM -- it doesn't mean we have just one bug for the whole spec :) > > So only shadow reference combinator doesn't work for <shadow>? I'm thinking > of something like: > > <x-A> > <template> > <style> > content /select/ div.special { color: red; } > </style> > <content> > </template> > </x-a> > > <x-B extend="x-A"> > <template> > <style> > shadow /select/ div.special { color: blue; } > </style> > <shadow> > </template> > </x-B> > > So, x-B cannot apply any styles to distributed nodes? > > If we depend on select attribute, we can add our own fake select attribute > to <shadow>. (It doesn't work, but <shadow> can have select.> > > I'mean: > > <shadow id="x">... > > getElementById("x").setAttribute("select", ":first-child"); > > So, "select" should be used when solving /select/? Not necessarily, I guess. However, I would avoid adding features to the spec until we have a good use case for it. I don't think there is one right now. 77013 3 tasak 2012-10-24 03:47:31 +0000 I'm sorry. I should file a new bug... Now I can find the reason why I feel a little odd about a select reference combinator. I filed a new bug, https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19684 (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > >There is not /select/ attribute on "shadow". Can you explain why we would need something like this? (possibly on a new bug :P) > > When I asked for a new bug, I didn't realize you were going to to reuse my > other bug for this. I am starting to worry that I am mis-communicating > something. I want to keep discussions on bugs focused and easily understood. > That's why we have multiple bugs. One issue -- one bug. This bug is about > refactoring the styles section to get rid of rule applicability algorithm. I > can't figure out how the <shadow> discussion in your comment relates to it. > I guess they are all related to styles. But then again, all bugs I've filed > are related to Shadow DOM -- it doesn't mean we have just one bug for the > whole spec :) > > > > So only shadow reference combinator doesn't work for <shadow>? I'm thinking > > of something like: > > > > <x-A> > > <template> > > <style> > > content /select/ div.special { color: red; } > > </style> > > <content> > > </template> > > </x-a> > > > > <x-B extend="x-A"> > > <template> > > <style> > > shadow /select/ div.special { color: blue; } > > </style> > > <shadow> > > </template> > > </x-B> > > > > So, x-B cannot apply any styles to distributed nodes? > > > > > If we depend on select attribute, we can add our own fake select attribute > > to <shadow>. (It doesn't work, but <shadow> can have select.> > > > > I'mean: > > > > <shadow id="x">... > > > > getElementById("x").setAttribute("select", ":first-child"); > > > > So, "select" should be used when solving /select/? > > Not necessarily, I guess. However, I would avoid adding features to the spec > until we have a good use case for it. I don't think there is one right now. 77583 4 dglazkov 2012-10-31 21:41:26 +0000 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/rev/3647bf47a736