Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-nesting-1] & representing parent elements vs parent selector (#8310)

Results of the [mini-poll](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8310#issuecomment-1384064828):

There was only ~350 votes per poll on Twitter, and ~150 on Mastodon. Mostly limited to folks who follow me.

Folks were pretty divided when it came to:

```css
.a .b {
  .c + & {
    background: green;
  }
}
```

Twitter:

- `.c + :is(.a .b)` 45%
- `.c + .a .b` 40%

Mastodon:

- `.c + :is(.a .b)` 36%
- `.c + .a .b` 48%

Note: I didn't present these selectors as options. Instead I [described the behaviour](https://twitter.com/jaffathecake/status/1614976570996756480).

There was a stronger preference when it came to:

```css
.a .b {
  .c & {
    background: green;
  }
}
```

Twitter:

- `.c :is(.a .b)` 33%
- `.c .a .b` 48%

Mastodon:

- `.c :is(.a .b)` 18%
- `.c .a .b` 47%


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by jakearchibald
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8310#issuecomment-1385443826 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2023 13:43:25 UTC