- From: Simon Menke via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 09:54:14 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> As mentioned in #7796, there are some problems with the currently-proposed nesting syntax [...] I believe the issues are not just syntactical in nature. --- I've been following this thread for while now and I have some feelings... For argument's sake, I am going to assume that this proposal can actually be implemented correctly. To summarize my understanding of the impact of the current proposal(s): 1. No increased power in CSS's ability to style/layout pages. ie. plain CSS is equivalent to css-nesting and visa-versa. 1. It has yet to be shown that the developer experience is dramatically better than that of plain CSS. 1. More complexity in the CSS grammar. 1. More API surface and complexity in the CSSOM. 1. Tooling and IDE's will all need substantial changes to support nesting. 1. This is a significant departure of the decades-old precedent that `CSSRule`s are leafs in a stylesheet. I feel there is insufficient justification for introducing all this complexity without first exploring the actual goals of this proposal. I believe that having clear answers to the following questions can improve the conversation around the nitty-gritty details of the proposal. * What are we trying to solve here? (other than just _having nesting_) * Are there alternative solutions that accomplish the same result? * How do we balance DX and tooling support, browser support? * How does all this fit with the rest of CSS? -- GitHub Notification of comment by fd Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7834#issuecomment-1283735865 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2022 09:54:16 UTC