Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-cascade-6] Handle sibling-proximity in @scope (#7751)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-cascade-6] Handle sibling-proximity in @scope`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: The name will be @scope-siblings`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;emeyer> bramus: In regular scope, we can walk down the DOM tree<br>
&lt;emeyer> …Suggestion here is to introduce sibling proximity where the lower boundary is a sibling of the upper boundary element<br>
&lt;emeyer> …Syntax would be the same as @scope rule; different would be the at-rule  would be @sibling-scope<br>
&lt;emeyer> s/different/difference/<br>
&lt;astearns> ack fantasai<br>
&lt;emeyer> fantasai: With normal scoping, relationships are obvious, but here we’re only doing following siblings, so should make that a little more obvious<br>
&lt;emeyer> …Because we’re only going forwards in the tree<br>
&lt;masonf> FYI, I'm here and I understand the group wanted to talk about 8189 but I wasn't here earlier. Here now!<br>
&lt;emeyer> bramus: It’s implied by the name, I think<br>
&lt;emeyer> …The end boundary element should be a following sibling of the start boundary element<br>
&lt;emeyer> …It could be you style all the siblings from a certain element down<br>
&lt;lea> +1 to @scope-sibling over @sibling-scope for the reason fantasai mentioned<br>
&lt;emeyer> fantasai: I would go with @scope-siblings rather than @sibling-scope so they sort together<br>
&lt;lea> also typing @scope would bring both up in autocomplete<br>
&lt;lea> q?<br>
&lt;emeyer> lea: I agree with Elika on the naming; they sort together, they autocomplete together<br>
&lt;emeyer> astearns: Should we resolve on that?<br>
&lt;emeyer> bramus: I’m fine with that<br>
&lt;fantasai> i/lea/bramus: Would it be @scope-sibling or @scope sibling?<br>
&lt;emeyer> astearns: We do tend to go with non-plural syntax for things, so @scope-sibling<br>
&lt;emeyer> fantasai: The non-plural form reads weirdly<br>
&lt;emeyer> astearns: Yeah, okay<br>
&lt;emeyer> miriam: You are creating a scope of siblings<br>
&lt;emeyer> florian: We do have precedent for a few plurals<br>
&lt;emeyer> RESOLVED: The name will be @scope-siblings<br>
&lt;emeyer> astearns: Anything else?<br>
&lt;emeyer> miriam: I think we’re hoping things will carry over from the other one<br>
&lt;emeyer> bramus: There’s another CSS cascade issue at the bottom of the list<br>
&lt;emeyer> astearns: People have joined specifically for the animation issue, so I want to do that next<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7751#issuecomment-1479782777 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 22 March 2023 15:29:57 UTC