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
Currently there is no way to apply a set of rules to multiple scopes without duplication. <scope-start> and <scope-end> can be forgiving selector lists, but they create a single scope.
It would be useful to create multiple scopes at the same time. For example:
@scope (.scope1) to (.scope-1-end), (.scope2-start) to (.scope2-end), (.scope3) {
p { color: hotpink; }
}
roughly equivalent to:
@scope (.scope1) to (.scope-1-end) {
p { color: hotpink; }
}
@scope (.scope2-start) to (.scope2-end) {
p { color: hotpink; }
}
@scope (.scope3) {
p { color: hotpink; }
}
The main benefit is avoiding duplication (which is tedious and error-prone).
There may also be another benefit around avoiding cascade conflicts/ambiguity, which will be resolved solely through scope proximity. I'd imagine there would need to be a concept of "nearest active scope" within a group of scopes.
Currently there is no way to apply a set of rules to multiple scopes without duplication.
<scope-start>
and<scope-end>
can be forgiving selector lists, but they create a single scope.It would be useful to create multiple scopes at the same time. For example:
roughly equivalent to:
The main benefit is avoiding duplication (which is tedious and error-prone).
There may also be another benefit around avoiding cascade conflicts/ambiguity, which will be resolved solely through scope proximity. I'd imagine there would need to be a concept of "nearest active scope" within a group of scopes.
This should play nicely with some other existing proposals, including named scopes, scope() in
@import
/<link>
and stylesheet conditions.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: