- From: Bramus! via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 22:56:25 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I had this idea of changing the `to` keyword itself to `siblings` and let that be the differentiating factor, e.g. - `@scope (.foo) siblings (.bar) { … }` - `@scope (.foo) siblings { … }` Reasons not to like that: - It’s not clear upfront that you’re going to scope between siblings. You first need to read the upper boundary selector _(which might be long)_ and then come to know you’re doing a siblings-scope. - Weird to see when no lower boundary is defined I don’t think an extra at-rule (e.g. `@sibling-scope`) is feasible, to keep the number of at-rules in check? -- GitHub Notification of comment by bramus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7751#issuecomment-1397717400 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2023 22:56:27 UTC