[csswg-drafts] [css-cascade-6] Do we want to defer some or all of these scope extensions to level 7? (#8628)

mirisuzanne has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:

== [css-cascade-6] Do we want to defer some or all of these scope extensions to level 7? ==
Two of the open issues related to `@scope` are related to defining extensions to the syntax:

- https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8380 attempts to resolve complexity in 'scope proximity combinators' (`>>`/`~~`)
- https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7751 proposes an alternative 'sibling-scope' rule for generating DOM-horizontal scopes

Before we get into discussing and resolving on the details, I just want to note that neither is a core requirement for shipping the existing scope syntax. If we want to defer them to a future spec, the current scope rule can ship uninhibited. To consider each one at a time:

- The scope combinators are a syntax sugar over behavior that can already be achieved using `@scope` - but with the added complexity of resolving multiple subjects from a single selector. These may be worth pursuing, but it's not clear that there is a strong need for them - or that the 'semi-de-sugaring' solution proposed will make sense in practice. To me, these feel non-essential.
- The sibling-scope proposal has a stronger and more distinct use-case, but not an extremely common one. Since it would reflect the `@scope` rule more precisely, it may also be simpler to spec -- but not trivial.

I think both discussions are worth pursuing. I also think both could be deferred in order to ship the central functionality here.



Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8628 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Tuesday, 21 March 2023 21:56:52 UTC