- From: Lea Verou via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:57:23 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> _@LeaVerou wrote:_
>
> > I think I prefer my second idea from that comment:
>
> Doesn't that idea involve wrapping it all in brackets again, and thus bring us back to the double-indentation issue? That's why I liked the string-based delineators of `@nested;` (or `@nestStart ... @nestEnd`)—there's no implicit indentation needed.
Nope, not at all. Zero extra indentation.
I'll explain with some examples.
This is fine:
```css
.bar {
&.baz {}
& foo {}
:root.quux & {}
}
```
This is fine:
```css
.bar {
& foo {}
:root.quux & {}
&.baz {}
}
```
This is NOT ok (first nested rule does not start with `&` and is thus ignored:
```css
.bar {
:root.quux & {}
& foo {}
&.baz {}
}
```
This is fine:
```css
.bar {
&{}
:root.quux & {}
& foo {}
&.baz {}
}
```
--
GitHub Notification of comment by LeaVerou
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4748#issuecomment-966417702 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2021 15:57:25 UTC