- From: andruud via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 19:33:30 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> So a quick fix to the pressing issues could be to simply special case &. Honest question: what's the pressing issue? Pseudo-elements don't currently work, but it seems fine to have a restriction that we can lift later? I hope we can avoid panic/"quick fixes", and instead accept that this doesn't work until pseudo-elements actually work within `:is()`. > I'm not convinced that the specificity needs to be changed. Right, if we want to change that, it seems more pressing. It might be too late already. > Treating a & alone different than when used in a more complex selector seems extremely hacky and a source of confusion to me. +1 Maybe we can imply a _new_ thing around bare declarations instead of `&`, that behaves as if the parent rule's selector list was used directly (unwrapped), and that also serializes as that selector list? -- GitHub Notification of comment by andruud Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9492#issuecomment-1769194030 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 18 October 2023 19:33:32 UTC