Signals for Tailwind CSS (styling based on ancestor state via style queries)

Re:Signals for Tailwind CSS (styling based on ancestor state... by wruza on Saturday August 31, 2024 @06:52PM (#41412646)

Style attribute lacks a selector (“color:red” vs. “.comp {color:red}”), forbidding the most useful use case. Shadow dom is an inspection nightmare used only by a few progressive web purists. Style.css is an untyped incoherent spaghetti. There’s no really good place for an element style in current implementation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signals for Tailwind CSS (styling based on ancestor state... by krsdcbl on Saturday August 31, 2024 @07:50PM (#41412943)

op is not talking about style atts, but referring to nesting inline `<style> @scope { ... }</style>` to declare vanilla css in the scope & context of specific DOM nodes

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signals for Tailwind CSS (styling based on ancestor state... by wruza on Sunday September 01, 2024 @03:52AM (#41415083)

Isn’t it a “limited availability” feature? Why would they use it?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signals for Tailwind CSS (styling based on ancestor state... by paulddraper on Sunday September 01, 2024 @07:54PM (#41421318)

Yeah, but `@scope` is only if you don't want to support Firefox.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signals for Tailwind CSS (styling based on ancestor state... by spankalee on Monday September 02, 2024 @03:08PM (#41427990)

No, in taking about the native scoping you get with shadow DOM, which is awesome and not an "inspection nightmare".

[ Parent | on HN ]