W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > July 2021

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-cascade-5] Any needs to avoid other layers overriding name-defining @-rules? (#6461)

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 16:25:55 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-887654904-1627403149-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Any needs to avoid other layers overriding name-defining @-rules?`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Close no change, we should get a stronger use case`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;emilio> topic: Any needs to avoid other layers overriding name-defining @-rules?<br>
&lt;emilio> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6461<br>
&lt;emilio> miriam: so it's possible to give importance to e.g. using an animation (like using !important on animation-name)<br>
&lt;emilio> ... but there's no way to do the same for the animation definition itself<br>
&lt;emilio> ... we discussed how name-defining constructs should behave for layers, but there's no way to make them difficult to override<br>
&lt;emilio> ... that seems fine to me but OP wondered about whether there's a use case for it<br>
&lt;emilio> TabAtkins: without a strong use case I'd rather avoid adding another level of layering given they interact with tree scopes already<br>
&lt;emilio> miriam: agreed<br>
&lt;emilio> fantasai: how many of these things we have? We haven't needed one so far<br>
&lt;emilio> fantasai: layers end up reordering these name-defining constructs, and the question is whether it's needed to make them important<br>
&lt;emilio> ... important is really about needing something to be overridden<br>
&lt;Rossen_> q?<br>
&lt;florian> q+ TabAtkins<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> The fact that nobody's request the ability to put !important on these constructs so far (which is today's poor-man versino of layers) suggests it's not needed<br>
&lt;emilio> ... I don't think we need to add an importance mechanism to these name-defining constructs<br>
&lt;florian> q-<br>
&lt;florian> q- TabAtkins<br>
&lt;fantasai> [emilio agrees with TabAtkins]<br>
&lt;emilio> Rossen_: seems like we should move on until there's a stronger use case<br>
&lt;emilio> RESOLVED: Close no change, we should get a stronger use case<br>

GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6461#issuecomment-887654904 using your GitHub account

Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 27 July 2021 16:25:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:42:39 UTC