- From: Lea Verou via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 21:23:09 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@bramus The current evolution of the proposal would kick into rule parsing mode with `.` as well, so nothing would break in your code examples if you move the @-rule. @devongovett > I think & should be required in all nested selectors because it makes it clear where the parent selector is inserted and how the selectors are combined. Not requiring it leaves the reader guessing. @romainmenke > My push back is because you can omit it in subsequent selectors, not because it is required in the first selectors. The primary feedback we get from authors over and over is that they dislike that the `&` is mandatory with the current syntax, and want a syntax that just assumes descendant if no `&` is present. We are not trying to design a syntax closer to Sass because we believe that migration matters that much (as you point out it's a one time cost), but because if there were no parsing limitations, it appears that the Sass syntax has the best ergonomics. If some authors thing the `&` should be mandatory always, in every rule, and some authors think it should be completely optional, I'm not sure how we will reach consensus, except by majority, which is not a good way to make decisions 😕 Though I will point out that if the `&` is optional, nothing prevents you from having style guides that mandate it, so you can still write and read code the way you find preferable in your team, so in theory everyone can be happy. Making it mandatory means the % of authors that consider it noise to read and tedious to type *cannot* be happy. -- GitHub Notification of comment by LeaVerou Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7834#issuecomment-1273832669 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 10 October 2022 21:23:11 UTC