Note that this was targeting the M136 release, so we would have had another month to tweak this feature, and even a couple of weeks after that to land finishing touches (or to disable the feature, worst case).
As for signals, concerns could have been raised at any time between December 18th and now. TAG could easily have reviewed earlier, taking the one relevant pending change into account, but chose to delay (despite time constraints being communicated). (Unfortunate that I didn't pay attention to the GitHub labels, though - thanks for fixing that pastithas@ & jyasskin@ ). That said, I do agree with the core concern here, so we'll *retarget this for the M139 release (branching **June 23rd)*. This intent can be considered "on hold" for now, and I'll be back in June with an update. Meanwhile, the Blink implementation (behind a flag) is ready for experimentation. On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 10:06 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/CAKFBnUrzL0fYPNDHEbjHR9W4ZqA9oimA9%3DiFF5wAKPYSrFePxg%40mail.gmail.com.
