Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Early design review of Cascade Layers (#597)

> Thank you all!
> 
> > there is no way that frameworks can declare their styles as having lower priority than (author) unlayered styles.
> 
> We do define _all_ layered styles as having lower priority than any unlayered styles – so that behavior is already built in. I'm not sure what an explicit syntax would add to that default behavior. Can you clarify?

That's good to hear, though was unclear from the explainer. The following parts gave me the impression that all layers have higher priority than unlayered styles:

> The resulting layers & layer-order are:
> 1. *unlayered*
> 2. default
> 3. framework
> 4. framework default
> 5. framework theme

> In order to address the use-cases described, layers need more cascade weight than the selectors they wrap.

> Author-defined layers are listed in the document order where they are first introduced. For the purpose of this step, any declaration not assigned to an explicit layer is added to an implicit final layer.
> 
> When comparing declarations that belong to different layers, then for normal rules the declaration whose cascade layer is last wins,

> Results in the following layer orders:
> 
> 1. Important **Author** Origin
>    1. Important reset layer
>    2. Important base layer
>    3. Important patterns layer
>    4. Important components layer
>    5. Important *un-layered* styles
> 2. *Animations*
> 3. Normal **Author** Origin
>    1. *un-layered* styles
>    2. components layer
>    3. patterns layer
>    4. base layer
>    5. reset layer

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/597#issuecomment-767847383