You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We are now trying to apply styles in shadow trees to a shadow host which hosts the shadow trees.
So if we have no style scoped in a treescope containing the shadow host, we will use the treescope root node.
However, if we have some style scoped and the shadow host is affected by the style scoped, how should we treat styles in shadow trees?
I think, we have two choices:
Idea 1: stylesheets in shadow trees are treated as if their scoping node is a
containing treescope, style scoped always wins.
Idea 2: stylesheets in shadow trees are treated as if their scoping node is the
same as the style scoped's scoping node. The scoping node is the first one when
walking up from the shadow host.
Title: [Shadow]: clarify scoping node of styles in shadow trees (bugzilla: 22900)
Migrated from: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22900
comment: 0
comment_url: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22900#c0
Takashi Sakamoto wrote on 2013-08-08 04:05:46 +0000.
We are now trying to apply styles in shadow trees to a shadow host which hosts the shadow trees.
So if we have no style scoped in a treescope containing the shadow host, we will use the treescope root node.
However, if we have some style scoped and the shadow host is affected by the style scoped, how should we treat styles in shadow trees?
I think, we have two choices:
Idea 1: stylesheets in shadow trees are treated as if their scoping node is a
containing treescope, style scoped always wins.
Idea 2: stylesheets in shadow trees are treated as if their scoping node is the
same as the style scoped's scoping node. The scoping node is the first one when
walking up from the shadow host.
c.f.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-rTZa3gtTV-IbdYVtVVX0n_rhgSWLr6j7okJhsmMH0A/edit?usp=sharing
I would like to implement Idea 2.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: