Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-nesting-1] Can we relax the syntax further? (#7961)

@romainmenke 

> > I'm concerned this may not be true, e.g. I remember some proposal to use {} to set multiple longhands to different values without having to repeat all the name, like
> 
> Can we start a list of all the stuff we are sacrificing specifically to make this style of nesting possible?
> 
> I don't think we can really judge the impact of all this without mapping it out exactly.

I understand that you and a couple other people from #7834 feel very strongly about this. However, can we please keep that discussion in #7834? I opened a separate issue specifically so we could discuss implementation challenges. Whether this syntax is *possible* is orthogonal to whether it's *desirable* (though polling authors has shown time and time again that it is).

---

@Loirooriol 

Declarations *starting* with `{` should be feasible (@tabatkins can correct me), since that's unambiguous, as pseudo-classes cannot be empty, so that in particular would be doable. What wouldn't be is declarations using pairs of braces somewhere in the middle. 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by LeaVerou
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7961#issuecomment-1293997070 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Thursday, 27 October 2022 19:55:17 UTC