- From: andruud via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 11:16:05 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@sorvell I agree. However, I consider that incompatible with the mixins-are-order-dependent-for-simplicity resolution in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12417. Rules are processed independently _per tree_, and having order-dependence cross shadows would require that processing to happen in the context of a particular spot in the flat tree (which is not calculated at the time that processing takes place). This is much less simple than just dropping order-dependence altogether. > The scoping of mixing should hopefully be able to follow the rules defined for naming across scopes: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-scoping-1/#shadow-names Indeed. And that spec relies on non-element-attached named constructs being "global" and having a single definition within a given tree. -- GitHub Notification of comment by andruud Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12671#issuecomment-3442581673 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 24 October 2025 11:16:06 UTC