Details' contents matches a new details-content pseudo element.
Further work is required to make this pseudo-element behave per spec.
This pseudo should be element-backed per
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-pseudo/#element-backed
It's possible for absolutizing a selector to return an invalid selector
(eg, it could cause `:has()` inside `:has()`) so we need to be able to
express that.
Attempt 2! Reverts 2a5dbedad4
This time, set up a different combinator when producing a relative
invalid selector rather than a standalone one. This fixes the crash.
Original description below for simplicity because it still applies.
---
Selectors like `:is(.valid, &!?!?!invalid)` need to keep the invalid
part around, even though it will never match, for a couple of reasons:
- Serialization needs to include them
- For nesting, we care if a `&` appeared anywhere in the selector, even
in an invalid part.
So this patch introduces an `Invalid` simple selector type, which simply
holds its original ComponentValues. We search through these looking for
`&`, and we dump them out directly when asked to serialize.
Selectors like `:is(.valid, &!?!?!invalid)` need to keep the invalid
part around, even though it will never match, for a couple of reasons:
- Serialization needs to include them
- For nesting, we care if a `&` appeared anywhere in the selector, even
in an invalid part.
So this patch introduces an `Invalid` simple selector type, which simply
holds its original ComponentValues. We search through these looking for
`&`, and we dump them out directly when asked to serialize.
Note that this is the old CSS2 syntax, we don't support the CSS3 syntax
just yet. Also we don't actually implement the pseudo-elements, this is
really just to make the selectors distinct from the same ones without
these pseudo-elements.
Instead of storing the three-part specificy for every selector,
just mash them together into a 32-bit value instead.
This saves both space and time, and matches the behavior of other
browser engines.
It's still only a dummy as LibWeb doesn't have focused elements yet, but
at least now we don't treat "selector:focus" as just "selector".
This fixes an issue on google.com which was mostly grey - coming from
some menu item focus styles :^)
