- From: Michal Čaplygin via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 09:18:27 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
For me the "root specificity exception" (i.e. that root-level `&` targeting `:scope` has zero selector specificity, like in current Firefox and Chrome) makes also sense, but I understand that it seems like an extra hatch maybe. Intuitively I'd expect that when I fold everything I have so far in a style with one or more `&`s it should not change "much", i.e. in. ```HTML <style> & { & { body { --prop: 3; } } } & { body { --prop: 2; } } body { --prop: 1; } </style> ``` I'd expect to `--prop` to be still `1`. I see that it might be inconsistent with non-root `&` behaviour and explicit `:where`s would be required here to make it weak again, thus uniform with `&`'s general behaviour. I guess in ```HTML <style> :where(&) { :where(&) { body { --prop: 3; } } } :where(&) { body { --prop: 2; } } body { --prop: 1; } </style> ``` `--prop` gets resolved to `1` even in Safari right now? (Cannot test.) This also maybe raises a question for #8752 , whether `<el style="--prop: …;">` and `<el style="& { --prop: …; }">` should make any difference or not. -- GitHub Notification of comment by myfonj Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10287#issuecomment-2107065335 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 13 May 2024 09:18:28 UTC