Bug 81069

Implementing this requires changing the code such that selector matching is allowed to exceed the scope/context element, e.g., as done in the patch for bug 79075.

(In reply to comment #1) > Implementing this requires changing the code such that selector matching is allowed to exceed the scope/context element, e.g., as done in the patch for bug 79075. Hello, what does it actually mean in terms of "when it will be done"? Brona

(In reply to comment #2) > Hello, what does it actually mean in terms of "when it will be done"? It means we need to assess the benefits of this feature vs. the potential performance cost of its implementation. At least it will require some amount of refactoring for a nice implementation. At the moment I don't have the spare cycles to implement this, but I'll get back to it in the (hopefully not so distant) future in case nobody else tackled it in the meantime.

Created attachment 134774 [details] Layout test Layout test (to go in LayoutTests/fast/dom/SelectorAPI/element-scope.html)

Any plans here?

hi, any news?

Created attachment 191660 [details] Patch

Comment on attachment 191660 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=191660&action=review > Source/WebCore/css/SelectorChecker.h:83 > + const Node* contextualReferenceNode; Don't we already have scope stored? It seems bad to have both.

Comment on attachment 191660 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=191660&action=review Thank you for reviewing. >> Source/WebCore/css/SelectorChecker.h:83 >> + const Node* contextualReferenceNode; > > Don't we already have scope stored? It seems bad to have both. If only scoped style uses "scope", I will use. However, the scope is also used by :distributed. So I would like to confirm whether we can use ":distributed" in element.querySelectorAll or something. If so, scope value set by distributed is the same as contextual reference node...? I will add hayato@ to CC.

(In reply to comment #9) > (From update of attachment 191660 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=191660&action=review > > Thank you for reviewing. > > >> Source/WebCore/css/SelectorChecker.h:83 > >> + const Node* contextualReferenceNode; > > > > Don't we already have scope stored? It seems bad to have both. > > If only scoped style uses "scope", I will use. However, the scope is also used by :distributed. So I would like to confirm whether we can use ":distributed" in element.querySelectorAll or something. If so, scope value set by distributed is the same as contextual reference node...? I will add hayato@ to CC. I found the following in http://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-api2/ "Authors are advised that while the use of pseudo-elements in selectors is permitted, they will not match any elements in the document, and thus would not result in any elements being returned. Therefore, authors are advised to avoid the use of pseudo-elements in selectors that are passed to the methods defined in this specification" So querySelector with ::distributed returns no results. I will try to re-use "scope". I have to add a new behavior to SelectorChecker::BehhaviorAtBoundary.

Created attachment 192630 [details] Patch

Comment on attachment 192630 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=192630&action=review > Source/WebCore/css/SelectorChecker.h:51 > + enum BehaviorAtBoundary { DoesNotCrossBoundary, CrossesBoundary, CrossesScopeNotTreeScope }; StaysWithinTreeScope?

Created attachment 192645 [details] Patch

Comment on attachment 192630 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=192630&action=review >> Source/WebCore/css/SelectorChecker.h:51 >> + enum BehaviorAtBoundary { DoesNotCrossBoundary, CrossesBoundary, CrossesScopeNotTreeScope }; > > StaysWithinTreeScope? I see. Done.

Okay. I'll let you land it when you're awake :).

FWIW, I think that BehaviorAtBoundary enum looks slightly overloaded now. The difference between DoesNotCrossBoundary and StaysWithinTreeScope is too subtle.

(In reply to comment #16) > FWIW, I think that BehaviorAtBoundary enum looks slightly overloaded now. The difference between DoesNotCrossBoundary and StaysWithinTreeScope is too subtle. I see. I would like to try this issue in another patch.

Comment on attachment 192645 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 192645 Committed r145691: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/145691>

All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.