- From: Steinar H. Gunderson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2022 20:04:43 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I don't think this is going to work; just adding `&` everywhere is going to be increasingly strange and not very useful. (Also, the standard right now is defined in terms of relative selectors, which don't work like this at all.) For instance, `:is(.a) > .is(.b)` should then become `:is(& .a) > :is(& .b)`? Which means that `:is(.a) > .is(.b)` becomes something entirely different from `.a > .b` (which according to the standard should become `& .a > .b`)? Or that `:is(:is(.a))` should become `:is(& :is(& .a))`? -- GitHub Notification of comment by sesse Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7972#issuecomment-1295957677 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Saturday, 29 October 2022 20:04:45 UTC