Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-nesting-1] Name, terminology, and nesting selector misnomers are footguns (solution proposed) (#8329)

I made a [similar point](https://twitter.com/denk0403/status/1604029941955403776) during the WebKit vote last month, arguing to change the name to "Selector Inheritance" instead. However, my suggestion for doing so was mainly to decouple the behavior from the syntax, back when everyone assumed the behavior would be like SCSS Nesting. I was also worried that the term "nesting" would wrongfully entail scoping of styles, which the [WebKit explainer](https://webkit.org/blog/13607/help-choose-from-options-for-css-nesting-syntax/) did not mention.

However, now that the spec has agreed to use the nesting syntax **and** plans to scope nested styles to the selected elements of the parent selector, this feature is unmistakably "CSS Nesting". It just doesn't mean the same thing as "SCSS Nesting" because SCSS used bad terminology and should have probably called their feature "Selector Inheritance". 

That being said, since we're no longer getting SCSS-like nesting behavior, I agree that using `&` will just mislead developers and introduce a subtle but severe dichotomy between native CSS and preprocessor semantics. And since `:scope` already has the same semantics as `:is(&)`, I agree we should probably use it instead. It happens to be more readable too.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by denk0403
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8329#issuecomment-1399234472 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Saturday, 21 January 2023 11:36:37 UTC