On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Roland Steiner <rolandstei...@google.com>wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@webkit.org> wrote: > >> Very excited for this feature! >> >> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Roland Steiner < >> rolandstei...@chromium.org> wrote: >>> >>> As per discussion on >>> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-June/032056.html, >>> our implementation would diverge from the current HTML5 spec >>> >> >> Why do diverge? It seems like we should at least prefix the attribute with >> webkit in the case spec changes in the future. >> > > See above linked discussion for details. In the end we felt limiting the > selector matching to the scope is more natural, and - with the proposed > exception providued by :root and :scope - is more flexible. > > However, naming the attribute 'webkit-scoped' may certainly be a good > idea. > Yes, please use webkitscoped (no - since this is content attribute?). I would prefer not to use a flag for the following reasons: > > .) I already have the basic functionality working, with the exception of > scoped @keyframes and @font-face, so landing should not take a long time (I > am currently in the process of breaking the patch up, and adding more > tests). > .) There are quite a few changes that add parameters to functions, etc., > which makes adding a flag ugly. > Okay. SGTM. - Ryosuke
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev

