Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-syntax][css-nesting] Design of `@nest` rule (#10234)

The `@group` name, fwiw, seems perfectly fine to me. (And I don't have an opinion on whether it is a CSSRule (only has `.style`) or a CSSGroupingRule (also has `.cssRules`, tho the implicitly-created ones would never have anything there).) If the WG prefers that, I'm 100% okay with changing it.

Re: Miriam's idea of letting a name namespace the properties as custom props - I agree with Lea that it's a little strange it would work *completely differently* between the "no name" and "yes name" variants. I'd prefer to not have that sort of substantial divergence, and instead just do a separate at-rule for the namespacing functionality if that's useful.

Re: Lea's idea of having the grouped rules magically revert when they're IACVT - I agree with Romain that giving the rule a default behavior so it's not a no-op in the default case is probably a bad idea; it feels too magical that just nesting an MQ makes the styles in it automatically revertable, especially since the *actual* style rules in the MQ wouldn't have that. (But this could potentially be an opt-in behavior.)

This is the core issue here with any idea in this vein - the default behavior *must* be a no-op, because the parser makes these for plain ol' properties that were not *intended* to do anything special at all, and they need to act the same as the style rules next to them.

If we want to layer more behavior on this rule *afterwards*, to make it more worthwhile as an author-exposed construct, then cool! We can definitely do that, and since it has zero prelude it's very customizable for whatever purpose we want in the future. But the prelude-less version *must* be a no-op; it *cannot* be fancy.

But yeah, since [WebKit has now come out strongly in the "disagree" camp](https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/337), we need them to get into this discussion if they want *any* solution to happen - otherwise we'll either do nothing (retaining the reordering, also harming our ability to do mixins in the future) or do something over their objections. Compat is a ticking clock. @fantasai, @jensimmons, others?

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10234#issuecomment-2080079932 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Friday, 26 April 2024 20:32:13 UTC