I'm requesting a TAG review of Cascading and Inheritance Level 4 and 5.

https://www.w3.org/TR/css-cascade-5/#changes

• Explainer¹ (minimally containing user needs and example code): see minutes from Jen Simmons's presentation
• Specification URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/css-cascade-4/ https://www.w3.org/TR/css-cascade-5/
• Tests: https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-cascade
• Security and Privacy self-review²: https://www.w3.org/TR/css-cascade-5/#priv-sec
• GitHub repo (if you prefer feedback filed there): https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues
• Primary contacts (and their relationship to the specification): @fantasai, @tabatkins, @mirisuzanne
• Organization(s)/project(s) driving the specification: CSSWG
• Key pieces of existing multi-stakeholder review or discussion of this specification:
  • announcement about returning cascade-4 CR to WD to drop scoped styles and incorporate Shadow DOM requirements
  • issues raised about @import: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5864 and https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4838
  • minutes from Jen Simmons's presentation on cascade layers
  • minutes additional design discussion for cascade layers
  • minutes resolving FPWD of Cascade 5
  • minutes resolving certain cascade layer design points
  • minutes closing Level 5 to additional features
• External status/issue trackers for this specification (publicly visible, e.g. Chrome Status): L4 revert keyword

Further details:

• [your link here still points at github.io] I have reviewed the TAG's Web Platform Design Principles
• Relevant time constraints or deadlines: Aiming for CR in May/June
• The group where the work on this specification is currently being done: CSSWG
• The group where standardization of this work is intended to be done (if current group is a community group or other incubation venue): CSSWG
• Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this specification:
  • Some syntax-bikeshedding issues still open: layers term nested layer name joiner
  • There is an open issue against the @import chapter to get @import fetches properly defined against the [[FETCH]] model, so that cross-origin issues, etc., are well-defined. (We are attempting to fix this, but the Fetch spec is still somewhat troublesome to author against, and there are few examples of correct usage (even the HTML spec is still broken in this respect). We anticipate this will be fixed in a future CR publication, before requesting advancement to REC.)
• This work is being funded by: Google

You should also know that...

Cascade 5 is a superset of Cascade 4 which is a superset of Cascade 3 (REC). Aside from the @import sections and the definitions of new features, they've been kept largely in sync.

The Cascade Level 4 specification was reviewed by the TAG in https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/555

The “cascade layers” feature was reviewed by the TAG in https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/597

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please delete all but the desired option):

🐛 open issues in our GitHub repo for each point of feedback