Repository navigation
[selectors] ::shadow no longer exists? #7474
Description
https://drafts.csswg.org/selectors-4/#pseudo-element-structure references a ::shadow pseudo-element, defined in https://www.w3.org/TR/css-scoping-1/#selectordef-shadow
But that's an old working draft from 2014. I don't see ::shadow in the editor's draft https://drafts.csswg.org/css-scoping-1/
So this section may need to be changed.
Activity
[selectors-4] Update to ::slotted #7474
fantasai commentedon Nov 7, 2022
@Loirooriol Fixed by switching to
::slotted. Incidentally, the next example in the section... do you think there's something reasonable we could switch it to, or should I just comment it out?[selectors-4] Update to hypothetical ::shadow #7474
Loirooriol commentedon Nov 7, 2022
So,
::slotted()is an alias for other elements in the tree, and then I guess it makes sense to have internal structure.But I don't see https://drafts.csswg.org/css-scoping/#slotted-pseudo saying that it has internal structure.
Also, example 8 is still saying mentioning
::shadow:Also, AFAIK
::slottedis not valid, it should be::slotted(*)or something.fantasai commentedon Nov 8, 2022
@Loirooriol Yeah, I realized that ::slotted doesn't currently have internal structure... that's under discussion somewhere I think. So I switched it to be a hypothetical pseudo-element that doesn't exist, since we don't have any examples yet.
But still, that second example, which relies on both ::slotted and ::shadow existing, do I just comment it out or is there some valid useful thing you think we could replace it with?
[selectors-4][editorial] Clarify hypothetical tense #7474
Loirooriol commentedon Nov 8, 2022
If right now there is no pseudo-element with internal structure, then I would comment it out.
[selectors-4] Comment out the incorrect example of ::slotted having i…
Loirooriol commentedon Dec 10, 2022
Maybe even comment out the whole section?
[selectors-4] Update to ::slotted w3c#7474
[selectors-4] Update to hypothetical ::shadow w3c#7474
[selectors-4][editorial] Clarify hypothetical tense w3c#7474
[selectors-4] Comment out the incorrect example of ::slotted having i…