- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 22:25:43 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Reconsider placement of unlayered styles, for better progressive enhancement?`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: Prop: Reverse the prior resolution. Unlayered styles are highest priority` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <dael> Topic: Reconsider placement of unlayered styles, for better progressive enhancement?<br> <dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6284<br> <dael> miriam: Introducing, but fremy may want to jump in<br> <dael> miriam: In initial proposal had layers under default styles. At some point I proposed we change to have them at bottom of stack. Better matches user expectations. But does not match main use cases as fremy points out<br> <dael> miriam: People may want some of both. Have separate issue for that. Question is did we get the default right<br> <fremy> q+<br> <astearns> ack fantasai<br> <TabAtkins> q+<br> <dael> fantasai: I think somewhat useful to think about 2 positions as innermost and outermost. Outermost is lowest priority rules. Innermost is highest priority.<br> <astearns> ack fremy<br> <fantasai> s/rules/rules unless !important, in which case highest priority/<br> <dael> fremy: I reopened this because somebody that used to work at stripe posted example. At first thought browser was wrong b/c order seemed weird.<br> <fantasai> s/is highest priority/is highest priority unless !important in which case lowest priority<br> <florian> q+<br> <dael> fremy: Idea is you have layers that are base and theme. Then you add normal styles and declaration in the style was specific but overwritten by base.<br> <dael> fremy: Main reason layers nice I thought is CSS resets where you can't reset something because specificity of rule not easy to have resets<br> <dael> fremy: If the reset is above style of site it doesn't work. That's reason I think not right call. most obvious example to me would prefer styles to be lower than main styles of site.<br> <jensimmons> q+<br> <dael> fremy: It would be useful to see examples of other way<br> <astearns> ack TabAtkins<br> <astearns> ack florian<br> <dael> TabAtkins: I don't have a strong opinion on default. Important we prioritize issue to let you put unlayered at a spot. If we do that default doesn't matter as much<br> <dael> florian: Agree with prioritizing. I lean toward fremy b/c if we keep new unlayered is just a fallback. Unlayered is legacy and it feels weird that main way to write css is a fallback. My intuition is same as fremy.<br> <astearns> ack jensimmons<br> <dael> jensimmons: I agree. Sounds like we're mostly agreed. Unlayered should be most specific. Be confusing to write code as we have for 20 years and have it not work. Layered will be most organized and messy will be more specific and need to override<br> <florian> +1 to jen<br> <dael> jensimmons: Agree with fremy<br> <fantasai> +1<br> <astearns> ack fantasai<br> <dael> fantasai: I wanted to note seems that for files layered that are imported it def. seems expected behavior is lower priority<br> <jensimmons> and yes to having a way for Authors to change this default!<br> <dael> fantasai: Inline @layer blocks intuition might go other way where making more specific. I think if we have to pick a default I think fremy argument makes sense with jensimmons explaination of why<br> <dael> fantasai: Could go different with @import and @layer but might be more confusing<br> <dael> fantasai: Would be useful to create one off roles and decide if it goes above or below a layer<br> <dael> fremy: I think I agree. IN the other issue about how to spec ordering I made a similar proposal. This layer is priority and this is normal. That's the other issue, though<br> <dael> miriam: Swayed by this. In terms of other issue we don't want to go into details but do we want to keep it as defer to next level or do we want to try and solve?<br> <dael> fantasai: Sounds like we want to solve<br> <dael> jensimmons: Agree<br> <dael> TabAtkins: Only think that's difficult is figuring out when [missed] should be<br> <dael> jensimmons: Useful in transition to let authros decide what happens. Waiting for that tool could be painful<br> <TabAtkins> s/when [missed]/what name it/<br> <dael> astearns: Prop: Reverse the prior resolution. Unlayered styles are highest priority<br> <dael> astearns: Obj?<br> <dael> RESOLVED: Prop: Reverse the prior resolution. Unlayered styles are highest priority<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6284#issuecomment-937262197 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2021 22:25:45 UTC