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

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

From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 16:43:47 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-887667010-1627404226-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Having I think we all agree that `@layer initial { }` is simply invalid and the whole block is rejected. However, what of `@layer foo, initial, bar;`? Is that whole rule rejected too, or do we simply order foo and bar and ignore the non-existing `initial` layer?

I'm not sure, but I suspect making the whole rule invalid is safer. Otherwise, we might have people who introduce a `@layer initial { }` block, fail to notice that that doesn't do anything, order that layer into the middle of the stack with `@layer foo, initial, bar;`, and some day, if we do make the `initial` keyword apply in that situation, that changes the ordering of their whole page. I think this scenario would be less likely to happen if we ignore the whole rule, as then the author would be confronted with the fact that the ordering of their `foo` and `bar` layer don't work either, making it easier to notice.

GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6323#issuecomment-887667010 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 16:43:48 UTC

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