4 ms·

I disagree. Given the enormous complexity browsers have aggregated already, we should strive to make browsers "player apps" (like MP3 players): a relatively sim

I disagree. Given the enormous complexity browsers have aggregated already, we should strive to make browsers "player apps" (like MP3 players): a relatively simple front end with huge versatility in server apps and back ends, rather than, like, everything for everybody. I'm aware that ship has sailed a long time ago, but piling ever more not-so-well-motivated stuff onto browsers just means the next generation has to start over with a clean slate; actually I think this is inevitable already. CSS nesting is clearly serving the use case of components in web apps, as opposed to mere content-driven web sites. IMO a sensible approach would be to give web app developers powerful ways to tie into rendering and layout programmatically (a la Houdini API) when those apps will require JavaScript, and in many cases use CSS-in-JS anyway, rather than burden browser cores with ever more questionable CSS features. "Would solve 99% of use cases" also sounds like famous last words ;)

dmitriid 4y ago
> a relatively simple front end with huge versatility in server apps and back ends Define "relatively simple"? Nesting and scoping in CSS don't make frontend any more complex. CSS has had problems with it's flat top-level structure since the very beginning of its existence. Approaches like BEM didn't appear out of thin air. > CSS nesting is clearly serving the use case of components in web apps, as opposed to mere content-driven web sites. Even a content-driven web site has a plethora of repeating and/or complex elements that are a pain to define and maintain. > Would solve 99% of use cases" also sounds like famous last words Google has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into web components whose primary use case (that is, what they are being used for in reality) could've been solved by scoping and nesting. Same goes for all the CSS-in-JS abominations.

dmitriid 4y ago

> a relatively simple front end with huge versatility in server apps and back ends Define "relatively simple"? Nesting and scoping in CSS don't make frontend any more complex. CSS has had problems with it's flat top-level structure since the very beginning of its existence. Approaches like BEM didn't appear out of thin air. > CSS nesting is clearly serving the use case of components in web apps, as opposed to mere content-driven web sites. Even a content-driven web site has a plethora of repeating and/or complex elements that are a pain to define and maintain. > Would solve 99% of use cases" also sounds like famous last words Google has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into web components whose primary use case (that is, what they are being used for in reality) could've been solved by scoping and nesting. Same goes for all the CSS-in-JS abominations.