Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-cascade-6] Should the scope proximity calculation be impacted by nesting scopes? (#10795)

@mirisuzanne In other words, this would introduce a dynamic number of cascade criteria (for the first time)? A bit like specificity, but instead of (A,B,C), it's a variable number of components.

> But why? [...]

Last time this came up, we concluded that: 1) it adds complexity (both for impl and authors' mental model), and 2) it's not useful. Your answer to this question suggests that nothing has changed. Therefore, I do oppose this change, as it seems to (at best) only be about theoretical purity at the expense of other things.

> I'm also not sure how [...] complex it is

We'd ideally investigate that a little bit _before_ making any moves spec wise. @scope also shipped a long time ago in Blink. I would need to be able to prove that we even can ship such a change without breakage. Otherwise, we might end up with subtly different cascade behaviors forever, which is worse than just aligning on the current spec.

> I'm going to propose we resolve on @mdubet's proposal here

We should _minimally_ first answer the "But why?" with an actual answer, and explain why the more complex behavior is useful after all.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by andruud
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10795#issuecomment-2320619762 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Friday, 30 August 2024 09:21:05 UTC