- From: andruud via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 10:09:58 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
(I'm still not sure if I fully get it.)
> So instead of looking up mixin parameters with env(--x) as under the current proposal or var(--x) as you propose, you would look them up with var(--x from definition).
If that means mixin parameters are _not_ reachable with just `var(--x)`, this amounts to a change in how custom functions work (under https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12927), and I think I'm against such a change. It adds even more syntax pollution when referring to parameters in the common case.
In general I'm OK with adding an option to grab a custom property from a specific point in the ancestor chain. I'm not automatically convinced that we need a syntax _inside_ `var()` for that vs. `host-var()`, `container-var()`, etc. It's also worth thinking about how needed all of this _really_ is when you can do `div { --y:var(--x from host); }` with basically `:host { container-name: --host; } div { --y:container-var(--host, --x); }`, and similarly for everything else.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by andruud
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12990#issuecomment-3431537458 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2025 10:09:59 UTC