23045 2013-08-23 02:29:08 +0000 [Shadow]: ::part should override styles declared in a shadow tree 2014-01-15 11:36:00 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WebAppsWG HISTORICAL - Component Model unspecified PC Windows NT RESOLVED WONTFIX P2 normal --- 23062 1 tasak hayato hayato sorvell public-webapps-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 92488 0 tasak 2013-08-23 02:29:08 +0000 According to CSS cascading order, any style in a shadow tree wins comparing with ::part declared in document. (just talking about scope, specificity and order of appearance). However, it would be better to apply ::part in document if the rule has higher specificity than all styles in a shadow tree. For example, <style> #host::x-part { color: orange; } </style> <div id="host"> #shadow-root <style> div { color: blue; } </style> <div pseudo="x-part">style me</div> </div> If we cannot override, "style me"'s color is blue. We cannot change. So this makes it much more difficult to create <style> in a shadow tree when we want to use "::part". c.f. http://crbug.com/273138 92491 1 tasak 2013-08-23 03:57:49 +0000 I need to say about "the same specificity" case. In the case, document's style wins. For example, <style> #host::part(x-part) { color: orange; } </style> <div id="host"> #shadow-root <style> #target.targetClass { color: blue; } </style> <div id="target" clas="targetClass" part="x-part">style me</div> </div> #host::part(x-part)'s specificity is id + pseudo element(=class). #target.targetClass's specificity is id + class. So the rules have the same specificity. In the case, "style me"'s color is orange. 95358 2 sorvell 2013-10-25 20:11:56 +0000 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23467 is a replacement for ::part. 98488 3 hayato 2014-01-15 11:35:44 +0000 Closing this bug because '::part' was dead. 98489 4 hayato 2014-01-15 11:36:00 +0000 Closing this bug because '::part' was dead.