Bug 93545

Summary: Animation keyframes do not function when placed in a style element in a shadowRoot
Product: WebKit Reporter: Steve Orvell <sorvell>
Component: DOMAssignee: Nobody <webkit-unassigned>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE    
Severity: Normal CC: dglazkov, dominicc, morrita, tasak, webcomponents-bugzilla
Priority: P2 Keywords: HasReduction
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)   
Hardware: Macintosh Intel   
OS: OS X 10.7   
Bug Depends on: 72462    
Bug Blocks:    
Attachments:
Description Flags
Reduction none

Description Steve Orvell 2012-08-08 16:08:36 PDT
Created attachment 157320 [details]
Reduction

If a style element inside a shadowRoot defines an animation via @-webkit-keyframes, the animation does not run when used within the shadowRoot.

However, if a style element inside a shadowRoot refers to an animation in a document style element, the animation does run when used within the shadowRoot.
Comment 1 Takashi Sakamoto 2012-08-09 19:00:11 PDT
As styles in a shadow DOM subtree are treated as "scoped" and all scoped @keyframes are ignored (c.f. bug 72462), @-webkit-keyframes declared in a shadow DOM subtree doesn't work.

c.f. 
StyleResolver.cpp
            // FIXME (BUG 72462): We don't add @keyframe rules of scoped style sheets for the moment.                                                                      
            if (scope)
                continue;
            resolver->addKeyframeStyle(static_cast<StyleRuleKeyframes*>(rule));

and 
<style scoped>: Implement scoped @keyframes
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72462

Best regards,
Takashi Sakamoto

(In reply to comment #0)
> Created an attachment (id=157320) [details]
> Reduction
> 
> If a style element inside a shadowRoot defines an animation via @-webkit-keyframes, the animation does not run when used within the shadowRoot.
> 
> However, if a style element inside a shadowRoot refers to an animation in a document style element, the animation does run when used within the shadowRoot.
Comment 2 Dominic Cooney 2012-08-12 21:23:52 PDT
What should the semantics here be?
Comment 3 Takashi Sakamoto 2012-11-02 03:51:45 PDT

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 72462 ***