LGTM3 On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 3:54 AM Manuel Rego Casasnovas <[email protected]> wrote:
> LGTM2 > > On 04/10/2023 11:49, Yoav Weiss wrote: > > Thanks for clarifying and verifying! :) My LGTM still stands. > > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 11:48 AM Anders Hartvoll Ruud > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 8:46 PM Anders Hartvoll Ruud > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 3:14 PM Yoav Weiss > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > LGTM1 > > > > Thanks for evaluating the compat risk for this. While > > non-zero, it seems manageable given Mozilla already shipping > > this, with Safari likely to follow, given the landed > > implementation. > > > > > > Clarification: Mozilla is shipping the main part of the feature > > (retrying a failed declaration as a nested style rule), but they > > are not (yet) shipping the tweaks to css-syntax described as > > risk (1) and (2). (1) is a recent resolution (~three weeks), so > > no mystery there. (2) has been part of this all along - I assume > > it was seen as something that could be done separately (and it > is). > > > > > > Just to make sure it wasn't /deliberately/ omitted for whatever > > reason, I checked with Emilio and they do intend to implement (1) > > and (2) once it's specified. > > > > > > So in this case "Mozilla: Shipping" should only be interpreted > > as a positive signal for the overall change, not as a way to > > manage compat risk. :-) > > > > I'll emphasize again though, that in both (1) and (2), we're > > just changing from one kind of invalid/has-no-effect to a > > /slightly/ different kind of invalid/has-no-effect. > > > > On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 1:30 PM Anders Hartvoll Ruud > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > Contact emails > > > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > > Specification > > > > > https://drafts.csswg.org/css-syntax/#consume-block-contents < > https://drafts.csswg.org/css-syntax/#consume-block-contents> > > > > > > Summary > > > > Allows nested style rules > > < > https://drafts.csswg.org/css-nesting-1/#nested-style-rule> to begin with > an identifier. For example, the following will now be possible: > > > > > > p { > > > > span { color: green; } > > > > } > > > > > > <p> > > > > <span>I am green</span> > > > > </p> > > > > > > Before this change, the inner spanselector had to be > > “escaped” using :is()or similar, due to restrictions in > > css-syntax. These restrictions have now been lifted by > > giving the parser the ability to restart > > < > https://drafts.csswg.org/css-syntax/#token-stream-restore-a-mark>. > > > > > > Blink component > > > > Blink>CSS > > < > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3ECSS> > > > > > > TAG review > > > > None > > > > > > TAG review status > > > > Not applicable > > > > > > Risks > > > > > > > > Interoperability and Compatibility > > > > To address some problematic parsing edge cases, the > > CSSWG has made two additional changes to css-syntax that > > have theoretical web-facing impact. These changes will > > ship in this intent as well: > > > > > > 1. > > > > Braces ({}) are now fundamentally invalid in > > standard properties, unless they span the whole > > value. No property grammar allows {}in any part of > > the value currently, so this is already invalid, but > > when var()is used in combination with {}, this > > intent changes whenit becomes invalid. With this > > intent, e.g. color: var(--x) {};becomes invalid > > parse-timeinstead of at computed-value time > > < > https://drafts.csswg.org/css-variables/#invalid-at-computed-value-time>. > This isan observable difference, but there’s no known reason for this to > occur in practice outside of mistakes. Nevertheless, I have tried to > estimate the number of possibly-impacted sites: ~0.0011% (Web Compat > Analysis: Relaxed Nesting < > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WxIAXWFy3q9XJrFK8k2J5my71jn8Cvdxq6Z8NAg99Q0/edit#bookmark=id.ufp2erlyto93 > >[@chromium.org <http://chromium.org>]). > > > > 2. > > > > A style rule prelude (i.e. the selector list) can no > > longer start with --ident:. Again, this is in a > > sense already “invalid”, since HTML elements never > > start with -- (including custom elements, which must > > start with a letter), so such rules can never match > > anything. This intent makes the situation a parse > > error instead. Estimated impact: ~0.0007% (Web > > Compat Analysis: Relaxed Nesting > > < > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WxIAXWFy3q9XJrFK8k2J5my71jn8Cvdxq6Z8NAg99Q0/edit#bookmark=id.geo17wxm8bwh > >[@chromium.org <http://chromium.org>]). > > > > > > Gecko: Shipped/Shipping > > ( > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/117.0/releasenotes < > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/117.0/releasenotes>) > > > > > > WebKit: In development > > (https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pull/17189 > > <https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pull/17189>) > > > > > > Web developers: No signals > > > > > > Other signals: > > > > > > WebView application risks > > > > Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of > > existing APIs, such that it has potentially high risk > > for Android WebView-based applications? > > > > None > > > > > > > > Debuggability > > > > Nested style rules that start with identifiers appear in > > the inspector like other nested style rules. > > > > > > > > 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 > > < > https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md > >? > > > > Yes > > > > > > The tests exist in wpt_internal/css/css-nesting/ident at > > the time of writing, but will be upstreamed when the > > feature is turned on. > > > > > > Flag name on chrome://flags > > > > CSSNestingIdent > > > > > > Finch feature name > > > > I’m not sure what a “Finch feature name” is. There have > > been no Finch trialsrelated to this, but the feature is > > guarded by the Blink runtime flag “CSSNestingIdent” with > > “base_feature” unset, which automatically generates a > > corresponding base::Feature. > > > > > > Non-finch justification > > > > None > > > > > > Requires code in //chrome? > > > > False > > > > > > Estimated milestones > > > > Shipping on desktop > > > > > > > > 120 > > > > > > Shipping on Android > > > > > > > > 120 > > > > > > Shipping on WebView > > > > > > > > 120 > > > > > > > > > > Anticipated spec changes > > > > > > These issues need to be resolved and/or edited into the > > spec beforeshipping. > > > > > > * > > > > https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9317 > > <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9317>The > > behavior that braces are invalid in standard > > properties (unless it’s the whole value) was > > resolved at TPAC 2023, but css-syntax has not been > > updated yet. > > > > * > > > > https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9336 > > <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9336>This > is a tweak to the error recovery of the --ident: case. This needs a > resolution, and an edit. > > > > > > There are no anticipated spec changes aftershipping. > > > > > > Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status > > > > https://chromestatus.com/feature/5070369895743488 > > <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5070369895743488> > > > > > > This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform > > Status <https://chromestatus.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 > > [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAKFBnUpW7rNg%3DUMe34ERTnaFug2W1FPzmYEypOKqLN1Kk1OE2Q%40mail.gmail.com > < > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAKFBnUpW7rNg%3DUMe34ERTnaFug2W1FPzmYEypOKqLN1Kk1OE2Q%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 [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfU8%2BZSKg5LApshP_C_oMKqaU17b25RoFNgH1fMaJgQe3w%40mail.gmail.com > < > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfU8%2BZSKg5LApshP_C_oMKqaU17b25RoFNgH1fMaJgQe3w%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 [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/7a09dcfd-d6e4-423a-882e-c5e365de3920%40igalia.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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw-Wv_6rJZ4vm5MQ4W22Eoy0V76zAX4y-wg4M0UVHRCDKg%40mail.gmail.com.
