Hi Alex. Yes, there’s been interest. Signals so far:
- Thomas Steiner tried ::highlight(*) before it existed <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9091#issuecomment-2703505587>, to share text-decoration declarations across spelling and punctuation highlights. - Bramus supported the syntax in the same issue <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9091#issuecomment-2704411823>, citing ::view-transition-group(*) as precedent. On Bluesky <https://bsky.app/profile/bram.us/post/3mwsj3yqnh22i> he called it “the one remaining thing with custom highlights that I found missing”. - Indirectly, MDN’s ::highlight() example <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/Selectors/::highlight#highlighting_characters> repeats text-decoration. - Custom highlights have no UA default style <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6375#issuecomment-884320559>, so today every name needs its own rule. Additionally, Mozilla engineers emilio <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1460#issuecomment-5916023045> and jnjaeschke <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1460#issuecomment-6124281195> consider it reasonable in the standards-positions issue. On Thursday, October 15, 2026 at 12:21:42 AM UTC+9 Alex Russell wrote: > As discussed at API OWNERS, it seems strange that we don't have any > developer interest for this. Presumably folks are asking for this, right? > > On Wednesday, October 14, 2026 at 2:02:55 AM UTC-7 Chromestatus wrote: > >> *Contact emails* >> [email protected] >> >> *Explainer* >> *No information provided* >> >> *Specification* >> >> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-pseudo-4/#selectordef-highlight-highlight-name-selector >> >> >> *Summary* >> Introduces a universal selector for custom highlights, ::highlight(*), >> which matches the highlight pseudo-elements of all custom highlights >> regardless of their name. The * argument contributes zero specificity, so >> its declarations act as a base style that rules naming a specific highlight >> override through the cascade. >> >> *Blink component* >> Blink>CSS >> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3ECSS%22> >> >> *Web Feature ID* >> Missing feature >> >> *Motivation* >> Styling shared properties across custom highlights requires repeating the >> same declarations for every registered name. The CSSWG resolved to allow >> ::highlight(*). >> >> *Initial public proposal* >> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9091 >> >> *Search tags* >> Custom Highlight <http:///features#tags:Custom%20Highlight> >> >> *TAG review* >> *No information provided* >> >> *TAG review status* >> Pending >> >> *Goals for experimentation* >> None >> >> *Risks* >> >> >> *Interoperability and Compatibility* >> *No information provided* >> >> *Gecko*: Under consideration ( >> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1460) >> >> *WebKit*: No signal ( >> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/728) >> >> *Web developers*: No signals >> >> *Other signals*: >> >> *WebView application risks* >> >> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that >> it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >> *No information provided* >> >> >> *Debuggability* >> *No information provided* >> >> *Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, >> Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?* >> Yes >> >> *Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>?* >> Yes >> >> >> *Flag name on about://flags* >> *No information provided* >> >> *Finch feature name* >> *No information provided* >> >> *Non-finch justification* >> *No information provided* >> >> *Rollout plan* >> Will ship enabled for all users >> >> *Requires code in //chrome?* >> False >> >> *Tracking bug* >> https://issues.chromium.org/issues/408003366 >> >> *Estimated milestones* >> Shipping on desktop 158 >> Shipping on Android 158 >> Shipping on WebView 158 >> >> *Anticipated spec changes* >> >> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat or >> interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github issues >> in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution may >> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure of >> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >> *No information provided* >> >> *Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status* >> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5174965228929024?gate=6101897755885568 >> >> *Links to previous Intent discussions* >> Intent to Prototype: >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/6a7e62a2.2164c308.b1fa7.0128.GAE%40google.com >> >> >> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >> <https://chromestatus.com>. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/3c86007d-70f7-4a72-b33a-1aacb44ac0d8n%40chromium.org.
