Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-nesting-1] Clarify when nested rules are equivalents to `:is()` (#10523)

I don't remember exactly why that decision was made. But my rough memory is that:

- There are existing rules in CSS that element selectors come first in a compound selector
- Both `&article` and `article&` would have the same meaning according to CSS nesting logic, so we don't _need_ both
- The two mean different things in Sass, where `&article` could resolve to an entirely different kind of selector

So allowing `&bar` would break existing CSS rules, and add confusion with Sass behavior, without providing any new functionality?

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by mirisuzanne
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10523#issuecomment-3985590240 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Monday, 2 March 2026 16:54:06 UTC