On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 7:40:19 AM UTC+9 nightpool wrote:
Hi all, I realize this is kind of late in the feedback process, but while
reading the syntax examples here I found myself pretty confused by the
meaning of the "to" keyword. Especially given that the tendency is to read
it as the
This is not something that Google can change unilaterally since the feature
was specified by the CSS Working Group.
A better venue for this feedback may be the CSS Working Group Github
(https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts) . Use [css-cascade-6] in the title of
the issue so it'll get to the rig
Hi all, I realize this is kind of late in the feedback process, but while
reading the syntax examples here I found myself pretty confused by the
meaning of the "to" keyword. Especially given that the tendency is to read
it as the English language sentence "Scope .foo to .bar", it seems to
intro
On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 5:54 PM slightlyoff via Chromestatus <
admin+slightly...@cr-status.appspotmail.com> wrote:
> LGTM3. If we have a potential `:visited` issue, we should make sure this
> is shipped with a feature flag for the next few releases. The long term
> solution for `:visited` is to mak
LGTM3. If we have a potential `:visited` issue, we should make sure this is
shipped with a feature flag for the next few releases. The long term solution
for `:visited` is to make it less brittle (aka "directed visitedness") as we're
going to keep adding new combinators that invalidate the assum
On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 4:07 PM Artur Janc wrote:
> I'm wondering how @scope will interact with :visited (to make sure we
> avoid exposing the visitedness of links as per
> https://dbaron.org/mozilla/visited-privacy)
The exact privacy measures related to :visited/:link (in general) are
unspecifi
I'm wondering how @scope will interact with :visited (to make sure we avoid
exposing the visitedness of links as per
https://dbaron.org/mozilla/visited-privacy) -- are all links treated as
unvisited for the purposes of @scope?
On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 11:49:40 PM UTC+2 Chris Harrelson wrote:
LGTM2!
On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 1:24 PM 'Miriam Suzanne' via blink-dev <
blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote:
> Haha, good to hear - thanks.
>
> Cheers,
> -Miriam
> On Jun 2, 2023 at 6:59 AM -0600, Yoav Weiss ,
> wrote:
>
> LGTM1
>
> This seems like an obvious useful addition with relatively broad consen
Haha, good to hear - thanks.
Cheers,
-Miriam
On Jun 2, 2023 at 6:59 AM -0600, Yoav Weiss , wrote:
> LGTM1
>
> This seems like an obvious useful addition with relatively broad consensus
> around it. Thanks for working on this!
>
> > On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Anders Hartvoll Ruud
> > wrote:
LGTM1
This seems like an obvious useful addition with relatively broad consensus
around it. Thanks for working on this!
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Anders Hartvoll Ruud
wrote:
> Contact emails
>
> andr...@chromium.org
>
> Explainer
>
> https://css.oddbird.net/scope/explainer
>
+Miriam Suza
Contact emails
andr...@chromium.org
Explainer
https://css.oddbird.net/scope/explainer
Specification
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-cascade-6/#scope-atrule
Summary
Allows authors to scope style rules to a given element. The key differences
between this and regular descendant combinators are:
11 matches
Mail list logo
