Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-cascade] [css-nesting] Figure out whether we're fine with "shifting up" bare declarations after rules (#8738)

I thought it was very odd that the [WebKit poll](https://webkit.org/blog/14571/css-nesting-and-the-cascade/) seems to be favoring Option 1, so I posted a couple more polls:

- Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/LeaVerou/status/1709573062411088204
- Mastodon: https://front-end.social/@leaverou/111177156184963593

which so far seem to be showing a _very_ different picture with more than 3 out of 4 expecting no shifting. There are even [people incorrectly explaining](https://front-end.social/@steveworkman@webperf.social) what happens:

> supports doesn't change specificity, so it'd be the last one in the ruleset

I think the current behavior is **extremely unintuitive**, and 10 years down the line we will regret opting for consistency with today’s preprocessors over predictable behavior. In fact, we even have a TAG principle advising against this exact thing: [Prioritize usability over compatibility with third party tools](https://www.w3.org/TR/design-principles/#third-party-tools).
I'd even vote for entirely disallowing declarations after rules over the current behavior, as it would give us more time to figure this out.

Perhaps we need more data here. Maybe an MDN short survey?

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by LeaVerou
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8738#issuecomment-1746990112 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Wednesday, 4 October 2023 14:26:31 UTC