Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-conditional] testing support of properties and values with partial implementations (#3559)

Is there a reason the previous suggestions list the display type last? It seems more intuitive to me to have keywords that list the display type first and then follow it with the requested feature.

`feature(flex-gap)`

Using `feature()` is not my favorite solution.

Since the current resolution is to implement keywords only on rare occasions (1 a year, per the log) and to make it easy to educate everyone to use with minimal confusion, I think it would be better to use a keyword that screams "this is a very special use case" rather than a generic term like `feature()`. I think using `feature()` sets a reasonable expectation that you can check for any set of CSS features, and it will cause confusion when it doesn't work that way.

Even something like `case()` or `keyword()` or just `key()` seems better to me (though I don't love any of those).

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by JoshuaLindquist
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3559#issuecomment-1924521929 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Friday, 2 February 2024 19:14:40 UTC