LGTM3 with same conditions outlined by Rick and Philip.
On 1/25/23 12:30 PM, Rick Byers wrote:
We discussed this in the API owner meeting today (Philip, Rego,
Daniel, Chris, Yoav, Mike Taylor and myself). We appreciate that
there's not yet full consensus on the API syntax, but also that we've
been in this state for several months and we've heard pretty clearly
from web developers that as a whole they want us to ship something and
overwhelmingly support option 3
<https://webkit.org/blog/13607/help-choose-from-options-for-css-nesting-syntax/>.
It seems to me we're in real danger of a priority of constituencies
<https://www.w3.org/TR/design-principles/#priority-of-constituencies>
inversion here with authors continuing to lose out as a result of
indecision from the implementer and standards community.
Therefore, since option 3 seems to have the bulk of support from web
developers and browser implementers, I agree with Philip that, absent
any stronger consensus emerging, we should proceed with shipping it
for M112 (not M111 which is branching this week). *LGTM2* (with the
same criteria as Philip).
However, if the CSSWG resolves to materially change the design or the
TAG completes their review
<https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/791> and requests
specific breaking changes prior to Chrome 112 going to Beta around
*March 1st*, then I'd retract my LGTM and ask us to flag it back off
and circle back here to allow for a new attempt at building more
consensus. As always, some breaking changes may be possible after that
point too, but it'll depend on the realities of web compat.
API owners also agreed that we'd look for 4 LGTMs in this case instead
of the usual 3.
Thanks,
Rick
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 11:24 AM Philip Jägenstedt
<foo...@chromium.org> wrote:
LGTM1
I had a chat with Steinar today to answer my questions. Out of the
open issues, the important ones to resolve before shipping are:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7850
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7971
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7972
Those don't seem controversial. My LGTM is assuming spec and tests
are updated and that we pass those tests before the
feature reaches stable.
The final test failure is related to #7850 and is an easy fix.
Regarding the syntax, there's still disagreement in the CSSWG.
Unanimous consensus among all WG members doesn't seem possible
here, for any proposal. Crucially, other browser vendors appear to
be OK with "option 3". I would definitely reconsider my LGTM if
there were signs that other browser vendors are not keen on
shipping option 3, since that would create an interop problem, and
eventually site compat problems as well.
As always, we should be receptive to new information even after an
intent has been approved and the flag has been flipped.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 11:20 AM Manuel Rego Casasnovas
<r...@igalia.com> wrote:
Adding to Philip questions, there seems to be quite a lot of
ongoing
discussions around this topic on the CSSWG, for example today
there's a
special meeting only for CSS Nesting topics:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2023Jan/0011.html
What's their impact on the current implementation?
Thanks,
Rego
On 23/01/2023 18:00, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
> I think that we should ship this. It's a high profile and
in-demand new
> feature
>
<https://2022.stateofcss.com/en-US/usage/#missing_features_freeform>,
so
> I have a few questions and comments first.
>
> Taking a look at the open spec issues
> (https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/labels/css-nesting-1
> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/labels/css-nesting-1>)
some are
> explicitly ideas for future changes, but are there any where
shipping
> amounts to a decision that isn't easily changed? I'm
thinking especially
> of the CSSOM issues.
>
> In https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-nesting
> <https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-nesting> there's a single
subtest
> failure, related to how a rule serializes. Is that
implemented per spec,
> or is it tied up with the open CSSOM issues?
>
> Regarding the threat of a formal objection, there doesn't
appear to be
> any solution that would fully satisfy everyone, but I trust your
> judgment that this is the best option. Additionally, we
should not
> pre-commit Blink to shipping parser changes, and accept the
possibility
> that what we ship now is the final shape of the feature.
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 10:42 AM 'Steinar H. Gunderson' via
blink-dev
> <blink-dev@chromium.org <mailto:blink-dev@chromium.org>> wrote:
>
> Contact emails: se...@chromium.org
<mailto:se...@chromium.org>,
> futh...@chromium.org <mailto:futh...@chromium.org>
> Explainer: None
>
> Specification: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-nesting
> <https://drafts.csswg.org/css-nesting>
>
> Summary: Add the ability to nest CSS style rules inside
other style
> rules,
> combining selectors from the outer with the inner rule
for increasing
> modularity and maintainability of style sheets.
>
> Blink component: Blink>CSS
>
> TAG review:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/791
> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/791>
>
> TAG review status: Pending
>
> Risks: There is a threat of a formal objection in CSSWG.
>
> Interoperability and Compatibility:
>
> Gecko: Positive
> (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/695
> <https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/695>)
> WebKit: Positive
> (https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/69
> <https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/69>)
>
> Debuggability
> Nesting style rules will be a big change for editing and
displaying
> style rules in the inspector:
>
> - Showing displaying nested rules for matching declarations
> - Editing selectors
> - Inserting nested rules
> - etc...
>
> Tracking issue for devtools support:
https://crbug.com/1172985
> <https://crbug.com/1172985>
> Devtools says they're on track for shipping in M111.
>
> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink
platforms (Windows,
> Mac, Linux,
> Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? Yes
>
> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests? Yes
>
> Flag name: CSSNesting
>
> Requires code in //chrome? False
>
> Tracking bug: https://crbug.com/1095675
<https://crbug.com/1095675>
>
> Estimated milestones
> DevTrial on desktop 109
> DevTrial on Android 109
> Shipping 112
>
>
> Anticipated spec changes: See above.
>
> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status:
> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5800613594529792
> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5800613594529792>
>
> Links to previous Intent discussions:
> Intent to prototype:
>
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/YzrEmc%2BqlqPv72Au%40google.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/YzrEmc%2BqlqPv72Au%40google.com>
>
> --
> Software Engineer, Google Norway
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google
> Groups "blink-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it,
> send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org
<mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>
> <mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org
<mailto:blink-dev%252bunsubscr...@chromium.org>>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/Y8ph9gk50U2D92f3%40google.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/Y8ph9gk50U2D92f3%40google.com>.
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google
> Groups "blink-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it, send
> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org
<mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>
> <mailto:blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org
<mailto:blink-dev%2bunsubscr...@chromium.org>>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYdMTE%3DjWA4AVXeJfGGTZ5WNzQCR4MiHONuZD3gq43PAOg%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYdMTE%3DjWA4AVXeJfGGTZ5WNzQCR4MiHONuZD3gq43PAOg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYdMTE%3DjWA4AVXeJfGGTZ5WNzQCR4MiHONuZD3gq43PAOg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYckGUc%3DxjifpXRrOi_UQ2SCXO%2B68GuDAT4r0B%2B8qC4WSw%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYckGUc%3DxjifpXRrOi_UQ2SCXO%2B68GuDAT4r0B%2B8qC4WSw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY8gz3jMDHJHDiNtuhA3S2bQ7j30WJirJ%3DWCevpxCpEivw%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY8gz3jMDHJHDiNtuhA3S2bQ7j30WJirJ%3DWCevpxCpEivw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/579baa85-3561-9614-102b-a20ae14a9fdf%40chromium.org.
