search

w3ctag / design-reviews

W3C specs and API reviews
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
331 stars 55 forks source link

Spec review for CSS Nesting #791

Closed sesse closed 8 months ago

sesse commented 1 year ago

Wotcher TAG!

I'm requesting a TAG review of CSS Nesting.

CSS Nesting allows users to write less repetitive selectors, using syntax similar to SASS and other preprocessors.

Security and Privacy self-review:

2.1. What information might this feature expose to Web sites or other parties, and for what purposes is that exposure necessary?
No additional information.
2.2. Do features in your specification expose the minimum amount of information necessary to enable their intended uses?
Yes.
2.3. How do the features in your specification deal with personal information, personally-identifiable information (PII), or information derived from them?
No PII.
2.4. How do the features in your specification deal with sensitive information?
No change.
2.5. Do the features in your specification introduce new state for an origin that persists across browsing sessions?
No.
2.6. Do the features in your specification expose information about the underlying platform to origins?
No.
2.7. Does this specification allow an origin to send data to the underlying platform?
No.
2.8. Do features in this specification enable access to device sensors?
No.
2.9. Do features in this specification enable new script execution/loading mechanisms?
No.
2.10. Do features in this specification allow an origin to access other devices?
No.
2.11. Do features in this specification allow an origin some measure of control over a user agent’s native UI?
No.
2.12. What temporary identifiers do the features in this specification create or expose to the web?
None.
2.13. How does this specification distinguish between behavior in first-party and third-party contexts?
No change from existing behavior.
2.14. How do the features in this specification work in the context of a browser’s Private Browsing or Incognito mode?
No change from existing behavior.
2.15. Does this specification have both "Security Considerations" and "Privacy Considerations" sections?
Yes.
2.16. Do features in your specification enable origins to downgrade default security protections?
No.
2.17. How does your feature handle non-"fully active" documents?
No change from existing behavior.
2.18. What should this questionnaire have asked?
Nothing comes to mind.

Further details:

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please delete all but the desired option):

💬 leave review feedback as a comment in this issue and @-notify @sesse and @lilles

LeaVerou commented 1 year ago

Hi there, given that there is an ongoing survey out to web developers about potentially changing the syntax again, is this a good time for TAG review?

torgo commented 1 year ago

Hi @sesse - thanks for this. When something is being worked on in an existing w3c working group we generally like that group to be participating in the review and to have had a voice in requesting that review. @atanassov @astearns as co-chairs of the CSS wg, in your view is this ready for TAG review? Is there consensus in the wg to request a review at this time?

astearns commented 1 year ago

@torgo we already have TAG members participating in the debate over syntax :)

Given the difficulties we have had around resolving the syntax questions, I think it might be good to give more of the TAG input into the debate sooner rather than later. Waiting for a TAG review until we have finally landed on some kind of consensus will likely limit the TAG’s influence on the syntax itself.

cynthia commented 1 year ago

After discussing this in our vF2F (as a non-CSS person) - I'm super confused. It looks like the "explainer" (which is a blog post) is quite outdated, and I wasn't able to provide an informed opinion on this.

jensimmons commented 1 year ago

The CSS specification is at https://drafts.csswg.org/css-nesting/

A simple author-centric explanation of how the current proposal for CSS Nesting will work is at https://webkit.org/blog/13813/try-css-nesting-today-in-safari-technology-preview/

The blog post labeled "Explainer" in the original post above was written from March 2019. It is incredibly out of date and should be disregarded.

rhiaro commented 12 months ago

Hi there, sorry for the delay in following up on this. Is this ready for us to resume review? If so, could we please have an explainer that is up to date with the current syntax for this proposal and any major outstanding issues? Thank you!

tabatkins commented 12 months ago

Yes, it's ready. I've lightly modified the WebKit blogpost that Jen pointed to (as it's also now slightly out of date) and folded it into the spec, at https://drafts.csswg.org/css-nesting/#explainer. (Give the spec a few minutes after I post this comment to regenerate.)

jensimmons commented 12 months ago

Oh, we should more heavily rewrite what was published on webkit.org back in March. That's significantly out of date now, too, since the requirement to start a nested element selector with a symbol is changed.

I wrote a more recent article which explains the update at https://webkit.org/blog/14571/css-nesting-and-the-cascade/

plinss commented 12 months ago

That's helpful, but doesn't really satisfy what we're looking for in an explainer. In particular, we're also looking for user needs and alternatives considered. (Note that this isn't just for the TAG, but we also do want to get TAG members who aren't in the CSSWG involved and it's helpful if they don't have to wade through all the discussions or get a potentially biased dump from others.)

LeaVerou commented 9 months ago

Hey there, We see that the syntax debate has settled and implicit & is shipping everywhere. We were wondering if we should just close this, or if we could still be useful by weighing in on some of the high level remaining issues.

plinss commented 8 months ago

We're closing this review as satisfied, glad to see the major issues resolved. If the CSSWG needs feedback about any of the remaining issues please file new requests.