- From: Keith Grant via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 22:04:02 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
keithjgrant has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:
== [css-nesting-1] Ambiguity of specificity when no nesting selector is used ==
The specification discusses specificity under the section on the nesting selector (`&`):
> The [specificity](https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-4/#specificity) of the [nesting selector](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-nesting-1/#nesting-selector) is equal to the largest specificity among the complex selectors in the parent style rule’s selector list (identical to the behavior of [:is()](https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-4/#matches-pseudo)).
However, it doesn't seem to directly address specificity for nested selectors that have multiple parent selectors but do not use `&`.
```
.foo,
#foo {
.bar { ... }
}
```
Is the nested selector here also equivalent to `:is(.foo, #foo) .bar`?
The current implementations in both Chrome and Safari seem to interpret it that way ([demo](https://codepen.io/keithjgrant/pen/ZEmrdGm)), and I think this probably makes sense from an implementation standpoint, but it should probably be stated clearly.
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9069 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 14 July 2023 22:04:04 UTC