Does your document have an in-line Security Considerations section, separate from Privacy Considerations? If not, corrrect that before proceeding further. Yes
This is currently a delta specification to [CSS Conditional 3](); the plan is to copy in all of that spec into this one, but currently this very short spec just has the one new feature relative to Level 3.
CSS Conditional 3 already has the ability to test whether CSS properties and property values are supported, before using them. This specification adds the ability to test of Selectors as well.
The published /TR specification does not have an example. Sorry! The explainer does, and one was also just added to the ED plus test suite coverage. Apart from that, the /TR and ED are identical.
In the issue title above add the document name followed by the date of this request, then the date of your proposed deadline for comments.
name of spec to be reviewed: CSS Conditional Rules Module Level 4
URL of spec: https://www.w3.org/TR/css-conditional-4/
Does your document have an in-line Security Considerations section, separate from Privacy Considerations? If not, corrrect that before proceeding further. Yes
What and when is your next expected transition?
What has changed since any previous review?
Please point to the results of your own self-review (see https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/)
Where and how to file issues arising?
Pointer to any explainer for the spec?
selector()in@supportsby L. David BaronOther comments:
This is currently a delta specification to [CSS Conditional 3](); the plan is to copy in all of that spec into this one, but currently this very short spec just has the one new feature relative to Level 3.
CSS Conditional 3 already has the ability to test whether CSS properties and property values are supported, before using them. This specification adds the ability to test of Selectors as well.
This specification, currently a Working Draft, is being advanced to CR soon because all modern browsers now support it
The published /TR specification does not have an example. Sorry! The explainer does, and one was also just added to the ED plus test suite coverage. Apart from that, the /TR and ED are identical.