Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

That's great to hear, thanks for the update. On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 9:51:19 AM UTC-4 Rune Lillesveen wrote: > We resolved to be bug compatible with Safari as the jquery breakage was > too risky to keep. This change has landed on the branches for 105, 106, and > on main (107) > > The

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

We resolved to be bug compatible with Safari as the jquery breakage was too risky to keep. This change has landed on the branches for 105, 106, and on main (107) The discussion around forgiving selectors will continue in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7676 On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 4:41

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

Thank you for checking the issue and sorry for not being able to prevent it in advance. I missed the risk of conflicting with JQuery's :has() implementation. I apologize for not checking enough. I made a CL to avoid current JQuery conflict by following the WebKit behavior: -

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 2:39 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 2:19 PM Rune Lillesveen > wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 1:37 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: >> >>> Thanks for the update! Given that this is something that web developers >>> have been using (as a polyfill, but still) for

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 2:19 PM Rune Lillesveen wrote: > On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 1:37 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > >> Thanks for the update! Given that this is something that web developers >> have been using (as a polyfill, but still) for a lng while, I'm >> somewhat skeptical that we can get away

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 1:37 PM Yoav Weiss wrote: > Thanks for the update! Given that this is something that web developers > have been using (as a polyfill, but still) for a lng while, I'm > somewhat skeptical that we can get away with the spec as currently written. > As we can't have

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

Thanks for the update! Given that this is something that web developers have been using (as a polyfill, but still) for a lng while, I'm somewhat skeptical that we can get away with the spec as currently written. As we can't have use-counters for things passed as jquery selectors, I wonder if

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 1:09 PM Rune Lillesveen wrote: > On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 11:40 AM Rune Lillesveen > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> We have an incoming issue for jQuery that seems pretty serious for them: >> > > An update on the impact for jQuery: > >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 11:40 AM Rune Lillesveen wrote: > Hi all, > > We have an incoming issue for jQuery that seems pretty serious for them: > An update on the impact for jQuery: https://github.com/jquery/jquery/issues/5098#issuecomment-1235351545 https://crbug.com/1358953 > > The problem is

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

Hi all, We have an incoming issue for jQuery that seems pretty serious for them: https://crbug.com/1358953 The problem is that jQuery uses the native implementation of :has() when present, but the feature detection detects support for other custom jQuery selectors inside :has() because of

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

LGTM3, once the implementation aligns with the WG decisions, there are tests, and the corresponding spec PRs have landed. Congratulations to all who worked on this feature! I think it's a great addition to the platform that developers will really like. On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 1:25 AM Daniel

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

There is an update! 1. All the :has() related issues have been resolved in CSSWG . (Thanks to everyone who arranged and discussed!) #6399 Remove the :scope

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

LGTM2 /Daniel On 2022-06-02 10:05, Yoav Weiss wrote: Thanks for the update! LGTM1 to ship, once we're aligned with the spec and WG decisions. On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:25 AM Byungwoo Lee wrote: There is an update! 1. All the :has() related issues have been resolved in CSSWG

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

Thanks for the update! LGTM1 to ship, once we're aligned with the spec and WG decisions. On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:25 AM Byungwoo Lee wrote: > There is an update! > >1. All the :has() related issues have been resolved in CSSWG >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

There is an update! 1. All the :has() related issues have been resolved in CSSWG . (Thanks to everyone who arranged and discussed!) #6399  Remove the :scope dependency

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

Thank you for the reply! To address the issues, I've added a comment based on the latest communication in this thread. - https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7211#issuecomment-1132432496 Hope this helps to solve the issues. 2022년 5월 19일 목요일 오전 7시 50분 52초 UTC+9에 Chris Harrelson님이 작성: >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

Hi Byungwoo, I think it would be better to resolve the referenced issues at the CSSWG, including aspects Antti mentioned here, before shipping. On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 6:05 AM Byungwoo Lee wrote: > > On 5/18/22 17:33, Antti Koivisto wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 9:19:03 AM UTC+3

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 9:19:03 AM UTC+3 bl...@igalia.com wrote: > > On 5/17/22 03:17, Emilio Cobos Álvarez wrote: > > On 5/16/22 11:05, Byungwoo Lee wrote: > > Anticipated spec changes > > There are 4 open issues posted on the csswg draft. > > * Remove scope dependency from

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On 5/18/22 17:33, Antti Koivisto wrote: On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 9:19:03 AM UTC+3 bl...@igalia.com wrote: On 5/17/22 03:17, Emilio Cobos Álvarez wrote: On 5/16/22 11:05, Byungwoo Lee wrote:     Anticipated spec changes There are 4 open issues posted on the csswg

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On 5/17/22 03:17, Emilio Cobos Álvarez wrote: On 5/16/22 11:05, Byungwoo Lee wrote:     Anticipated spec changes There are 4 open issues posted on the csswg draft.   * Remove scope dependency from relative selectors definition: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6399   *

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship : :has() pseudo class

On 5/16/22 11:05, Byungwoo Lee wrote: Anticipated spec changes There are 4 open issues posted on the csswg draft. * Remove scope dependency from relative selectors definition: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6399 * Disallowing logical combination pseudo classes