Lea Verou, PhD1d ago

🚨 Want mixins in CSS?
Help the @csswg by telling us what feels natural to you!

Look at the code in the screenshot. What resulting widths would you find least surprising?

A: All get 100px
B: div gets 100px, div > h2 gets 200px, div + p gets 300px
C: div gets 100px, div > h2 gets 200px, div + p gets no width*
D: div and div > h2 get 100px, div + p gets no width*

* from the mixin

Poll in https://front-end.social/@leaverou/116297811172593173

Please answer based on what feels natural *to you*, it's not a quiz.

Show threadPhilip
@leaverou What am I missing to potentially mean that `p` would have no width?
Mar 26 at 10:28pmWeb
Show threadLea Verou, PhD1d ago
@mez Sorry, I meant no width declaration is applied to it, i.e. it just gets the default width.
Show threadPhilip1d ago
@leaverou Right, but is the possibility of that only there because it's `+` and not `>`? How could it not have a width decoration but the `h2` would?
Show threadLea Verou, PhD1d ago
@mez The question is asking which outcome feels most natural *to you*. If it seems weird for no width declaration to apply in that case, then don't pick these answers! 😀
Show threadPhilip1d ago

@leaverou Cool, that's good enough. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't forgetting some "normal" case of cascade etc to inform that.

fwiw, I voted B, but A would be understandable. Dropping the cascade for mixins would be a little weird, but just another exception/oddity to remember 😅

Show threadLuke1d ago
@mez @leaverou I had the exact same thought process, "what why would it be different in the last case??, hmm okay maybe I'm missing something, but B seems right... Or maybe A 🤔" voted B too.