Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-cascade-5] Allow authors to explicitly place unlayered styles in the cascade layer order (#6323)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `explicitly place unlayered styles into the layer order`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Reject this proposal; unlayered styles have a specified location in the layer stack which can't (currently) be controlled`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;TabAtkins> Topic: explicitly place unlayered styles into the layer order<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6323<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: We left this at taking back to the thread to discuss syntax, and a lot happened<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: two frontrunner proposals<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: (1) unlayered styles are like any other layer, we just have a name for that layer and allow you to place it<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: That's the simplest option conceptually<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: it means the final page author always has control over layering, as they can place the unlayered style wherever they want<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: But it could cause problems if people explicitly need their styles above or below the default<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: If we need that...<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: (2) track two layer stacks, one above and one below the default unlayered styles<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: if we need that, fantasai and i came up with a syntax, you can put a slash in your @layer to designate whether your layers are in the "below default" or "above default" stack<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> miriam: think this'll work well, but you're conceptually tracking two layer stacks<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> fantasai: Third option is close no change, and just leave unlayered at the top of the layer stack<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> jensimmons: I talked with elika about this a lot recently. i think i agree with elika that the simpler version won't work.<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> jensimmons: Think about a team with a complex custom design with their own styles, then they pull in bootstrap or other third party complicated lib<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> jensimmons: And you crush those two together, there's a lot of room for unintented consequences<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> jensimmons: But as we talk thru the more complex versions, it's too complex<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> jensimmons: layers are meant to make the cascade more understandable, and i think making these two stacks, plus the combo with important vs normal, i think it'll be too hard<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> jensimmons: and there is a way - i'd need a diagram to fully explain - for the 3rd party framework to say "hey I want to rearrange the order of the layers" and end up overriding layers the custom stack doesn't want overridden<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> jensimmons: As soon as I started to understand how this could happen, I just said NOPE<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> jensimmons: So right now I'm okay with option 3, just leave the unlayered styles at a specified point. We can revisit in the future if we think we really need it.<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: I was not a fan of the 2-stack approach<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: while there are use cases for control, I'm fine with leaving no change for now<br>
&lt;fantasai> miriam: wfm<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> Rossen_: anyone object?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Reject this proposal; unlayered styles have a specified location in the layer stack which can't (currently) be controlled<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6323#issuecomment-984183967 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Thursday, 2 December 2021 00:35:09 UTC