@Jeffrey Yasskin <jyass...@google.com> can fix the outdated labels in the
TAG review to ensure it gets in the review queue.

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 1:17 PM Anders Hartvoll Ruud <andr...@chromium.org>
wrote:

> +Tab Atkins <tabatk...@google.com>
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 9:06 PM Alan Stearns <famuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is a feature that is greatly desired by developers, and as such runs
>> increased risk that whatever gets shipped first gets heavily used and then
>> cannot be improved due to web compat. I think it’s premature to ship
>> without signals from other engines and without a TAG review. We should have
>> more time with this feature behind a flag.
>>
>> Another signal for implementing behind a feature flag for now:
>> https://blog.kizu.dev/intent-to-experiment-for-longer/
>>
>> On Tuesday, February 25, 2025 at 4:26:25 AM UTC-8 and...@chromium.org
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Contact emails
>>>
>>> and...@chromium.org, se...@chromium.org
>>>
>>> Explainer
>>>
>>> https://css.oddbird.net/sasslike/mixins-functions
>>>
>>> Note: the explainer includes a description of mixins as well. This
>>> intent covers custom functions (@function) only.
>>>
>>> Specification
>>>
>>> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-mixins-1
>>>
>>> Note: despite its shortname (css-mixins), the spec currently describes 
>>> custom
>>> functions only.
>>>
>>> Summary
>>>
>>> Custom Functions are similar to custom properties
>>> <https://drafts.csswg.org/css-variables>, but instead of returning a
>>> single fixed value, it returns a value based on other custom properties,
>>> parameters, and conditionals.
>>>
>>> Example: Custom light-dark function:
>>>
>>> @function --light-dark(--light, --dark) {
>>>
>>>    result: var(--light);
>>>
>>>    @media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
>>>
>>>      result: var(--dark);
>>>
>>>    }
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> div {
>>>
>>>   background-image: --light-dark(black-logo.png, white-logo.png);
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> Blink component
>>>
>>> Blink>CSS
>>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3ECSS%22>
>>>
>>> TAG review
>>>
>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1031
>>>
>>> TAG review status
>>>
>>> Pending
>>>
>>> Risks
>>>
>>> Interoperability and Compatibility
>>>
>>> None
>>>
>>>
>>> Gecko: No signal (
>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1148)
>>>
>>> WebKit: No signal (
>>> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/437)
>>>
>>> Web developers: Positive
>>>
>>> (Dug up what I could find per goo.gle/developer-signals):
>>>
>>>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>
>>>    
>>> https://medium.com/css-magic/custom-css-functions-the-next-big-leap-in-styling-5acbd69f5526
>>>    -
>>>
>>>
>>>    
>>> https://johannesodland.github.io/2024/12/12/web-wish-12-custom-css-functions.html
>>>    -
>>>
>>>    “sorely needed functionality for authors”
>>>    
>>> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1031#issuecomment-2637024845>
>>>    - LeaVerou <https://github.com/LeaVerou>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>    Appeared as a missing feature in State of CSS 2024
>>>    <https://2024.stateofcss.com/en-US/usage/#css_missing_features>.
>>>
>>>
>>> Other signals:
>>>
>>> WebView application risks
>>>
>>> None
>>>
>>>
>>> Debuggability
>>>
>>> The Devtools team is working on “basic support” for @function:
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/17UCa0XDXAG9EBx18w1fXAA9SL3V9Lr4vTptaXYyE1CA/
>>>
>>> Unfortunately that doc requires @google.com to access, but “basic
>>> support” primarily means that callsites can be clicked, you’ll be taken to
>>> the relevant function, and you’ll be able to edit the contents of the
>>> function.
>>>
>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac,
>>> Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?
>>>
>>> Yes
>>>
>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> Yes
>>>
>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-mixins
>>>
>>>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>    at-function-cssom.tentative.html
>>>    
>>> <https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-mixins/at-function-cssom.tentative.html?label=experimental&label=master&aligned>
>>>  is
>>>    marked tentative because the spec is currently missing a few obvious 
>>> parts
>>>    from the API.
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       The subtest "Indexed property getter" is failing due to a
>>>       Bindings bug. This is an existing issue (likely low impact) that's
>>>       unrelated to Custom Functions. crbug.com/333965945
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    dashed-function-cycles.tentative.html
>>>    
>>> <https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-mixins/dashed-function-cycles.tentative.html?label=master&label=experimental&aligned>
>>>  is
>>>    marked tentative because the spec has not yet caught up with the 
>>> resolution
>>>    in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11500.
>>>
>>>
>>> In both cases, I’ll make sure we get these things edited so we can
>>> remove the .tentative suffixes before shipping.
>>>
>>> I do not plan to fix crbug.com/333965945 before shipping, which means
>>> that a failure on "Indexed property getter" is to be expected. I will not
>>> ship with any other test failures; unexpected red boxes on wpt.fyi may be
>>> considered temporary, usually due to Canary not having picked up the latest
>>> changes yet.
>>>
>>> Flag name on about://flags
>>>
>>> CSSFunctions
>>>
>>> Finch feature name
>>>
>>> CSSFunctions
>>>
>>> Requires code in //chrome?
>>>
>>> False
>>>
>>> Tracking bug
>>>
>>> https://issues.chromium.org/issues/325504770
>>>
>>> Estimated milestones
>>>
>>> Shipping on desktop
>>>
>>> 136
>>>
>>> Shipping on Android
>>>
>>> 136
>>>
>>> Shipping on WebView
>>>
>>> 136
>>>
>>>
>>> Anticipated spec changes
>>>
>>> At this point, I anticipate only one real spec change: disallowing
>>> argument values that begin with two dashes (‘--’). This is to make #11749
>>> (named arguments) <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11749>
>>> possible in the future without compat concerns.
>>>
>>> All other issues are not interesting in terms of compat risk.
>>>
>>> Full list (only the top one being interesting):
>>>
>>>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>    #11749 [css-mixins-1] Named argument passing?
>>>    <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11749>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       This can be added later. However, we should reserve space for
>>>       this in the syntax immediately, to avoid compat issues in the future. 
>>> Issue
>>>       398887938 <https://issues.chromium.org/issues/398887938> tracks
>>>       this.
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #10558 [css-mixins] <dashed-function> syntax seems invalid
>>>    <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10558>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Editorial issue. The commenter seems satisfied now: “So this
>>>       issue may therefore be considered fixed”
>>>       
>>> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10558#issuecomment-2255746650>
>>>       .
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #10006 [css-mixins] Allow mixins/functions to be called via custom
>>>    properties <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10006>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       We can choose to add this later; it does not affect the API
>>>       shipping now.
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #9992 Proposal: CSS Variable Groups
>>>    <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9992>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Same as the previous issue.
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #9990 [css-values][css-variables][css-mixins] Generic fallback
>>>    syntax for IACVT values
>>>    <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9990>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Same as the previous issue.
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #10222 [css-mixins] Proposal: @like rule for repurposing page
>>>    default styles <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10222>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Unrelated to CSS Functions. (Marked css-mixins since it has
>>>       conceptual similarities with mixins.)
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #11500 [css-values] Short-circuit if() evaluation
>>>    <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11500>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Resolved, just needs a spec edit.
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #11455 [css-values-5][css-mixins-1] Add an if-test for local
>>>    variables <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11455>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Same as the previous issue.
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #11190 [css-functions-mixins] Handling superfluous arguments
>>>    <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11190>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Same as the previous issue.
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #10562 [css-mixins] Should result be mandatory in @function?
>>>    <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10562>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Same as the previous issue.
>>>       -
>>>
>>>    #9350 Proposal: Custom CSS Functions & Mixins
>>>    <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9350>
>>>    -
>>>
>>>       Same as the previous issue.
>>>
>>>
>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
>>>
>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5179721933651968?gate=5074532782309376
>>>
>>> Links to previous Intent discussions
>>>
>>> Intent to Prototype:
>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/b-BTxKD-Ldc/m/1pyobjq7AQAJ
>>>
>>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "blink-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAKFBnUofT%2BKD_b7r28JUJRdUgCs9HJaFhStgZsg8QyTUfJgR3Q%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAKFBnUofT%2BKD_b7r28JUJRdUgCs9HJaFhStgZsg8QyTUfJgR3Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAJ8Nf20qcah2ksiTvyAw2_2gTh2icYgKAEfh0QqugmUUx9ZEXQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to