I don't see how this is the case here: - the nested CSS proposal supports everything the SCSS syntax does, plus some potentially useful combinations - the SCS

I don't see how this is the case here: - the nested CSS proposal supports everything the SCSS syntax does, plus some potentially useful combinations - the SCSS syntax would literally lead to a worse user experience, both for the end user whose browsing performance is now degraded, and anyone implementing parsers for CSS (since the infinite lookahead is quite a bit more complicated) - the committee isn't just "coming up" with the new syntax, they are asking for feedback. Let's not pretend this is the same as a committee deciding something without taking input from the affected users. I understand that generally a de facto standard will be more useful than a de jure one. But this isn't some committee coming up with their own convoluted version of a standard because of NIH - they are communicating clearly and openly around why the established standard would be problematic. Shouldn't we as a technical community try to find the best solution for the problems we face, instead of taking principled stands and ignoring the technical hurdles in our way?