- From: Miriam Suzanne via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 22:16:45 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I agree that we should keep things as simple as we can. And if we can avoid too much special-casing, that's great. Yes, best practice is likely to be ordering as much as possible up-front. But we've explicitly said that one of the goals is making it easier to consume third-party styles, and slot them in. That means we will _often_ be dealing with stylesheets that have different assumptions about internal layer ordering. So far that's ok, because you can consume an external file while also nesting it inside a layer. For that to continue working, we _have to_ handle the situation where `framework.css` is designed with unlayered styles in the middle, but is then nested into the specific layer of a site's styles. So I'd be ok with "initial is just a reserved layer name" – but not if that behavior is restricted to the root layer. Allowing it to be nested is the only way to make it work along with the existing logic. After a conversation with @jensimmons, she also liked that approach, but proposed `unlayered` as a more clear keyword. (I understand the reason people have been pushing for additional special-casing – but I think "nesting namespaces" has been our proposed solution for other potential naming conflicts, and I believe we can apply it here as well.) -- GitHub Notification of comment by mirisuzanne Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6323#issuecomment-946211920 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 18 October 2021 22:16:47 UTC