- From: Peter Linss via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 21:21:19 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Two clarifications: 1) The cascading behavior is an issue for either an at-rule or the SASS-style approach, so it shouldn't be part of the consideration here (I think). All of the other issues go away entirely with an at-rule approach. 2) The proposal on the table wasn't to "NOT pursue SASS-style syntax" anymore, it was to not *ship* SASS-style syntax *now*. We have the option to ship an at-rule syntax now, and continue to refine the SASS-style approach over time, and then ship that when we feel it's ready. That effectively just makes the `@nest` prefix optional later (authors who prefer the explicit rule at-rule could still use it). (And for those not on the call, I don't think any of the issues above individually are show-stoppers, it's just when you consider the complete list of the issues vs the advantages is when I start to have concerns. As with @Loirooriol above, it's not enough for me to object, but it was enough to go hmmm and ask the question.) -- GitHub Notification of comment by plinss Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8249#issuecomment-1505965556 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 12 April 2023 21:21:21 UTC