- From: Mason Freed via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 17:42:29 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Hmmm, you're right, probably zero for these cases, wouldn't risk something that doesn't work on Safari < 17. > I guess we can assume b here. Cool, thanks. Based on that, and also based on the fact that it's easier to "manually" opt back in to the old behavior (via `:has(:hover)`) than it would be to manually reconstruct the new behavior (via `:hover:not(:has(child_top_layer_element:hover))`) if we don't adopt the [proposal](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11185#issuecomment-2669855499), would you be amenable to going with that proposal? -- GitHub Notification of comment by mfreed7 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11185#issuecomment-2691214117 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 28 February 2025 17:42:30 UTC