Wotcher TAG!

I'm requesting a TAG review of CSS Nesting.

CSS Nesting allows users to write less repetitive selectors, using syntax similar to SASS and other preprocessors.

• Explainer: From Bramus
• Specification URL: spec url
• Tests: WPT folder
• Security and Privacy self-review: See below.
• Primary contacts (both are editors of the spec):
  • Tab Atkins-Bittner, @tabatkins (Google)
  • Adam Argyle, @adamargyle (Google)
• Organization(s)/project(s) driving the specification: CSSWG
• Key pieces of existing multi-stakeholder review or discussion of this specification: lively debates on GitHub
• External status/issue trackers for this specification (publicly visible, e.g. Chrome Status): Chrome Status, Chromium bug

Security and Privacy self-review:

2.1. What information might this feature expose to Web sites or other parties, and for what purposes is that exposure necessary?
No additional information.
2.2. Do features in your specification expose the minimum amount of information necessary to enable their intended uses?
Yes.
2.3. How do the features in your specification deal with personal information, personally-identifiable information (PII), or information derived from them?
No PII.
2.4. How do the features in your specification deal with sensitive information?
No change.
2.5. Do the features in your specification introduce new state for an origin that persists across browsing sessions?
No.
2.6. Do the features in your specification expose information about the underlying platform to origins?
No.
2.7. Does this specification allow an origin to send data to the underlying platform?
No.
2.8. Do features in this specification enable access to device sensors?
No.
2.9. Do features in this specification enable new script execution/loading mechanisms?
No.
2.10. Do features in this specification allow an origin to access other devices?
No.
2.11. Do features in this specification allow an origin some measure of control over a user agent’s native UI?
No.
2.12. What temporary identifiers do the features in this specification create or expose to the web?
None.
2.13. How does this specification distinguish between behavior in first-party and third-party contexts?
No change from existing behavior.
2.14. How do the features in this specification work in the context of a browser’s Private Browsing or Incognito mode?
No change from existing behavior.
2.15. Does this specification have both "Security Considerations" and "Privacy Considerations" sections?
Yes.
2.16. Do features in your specification enable origins to downgrade default security protections?
No.
2.17. How does your feature handle non-"fully active" documents?
No change from existing behavior.
2.18. What should this questionnaire have asked?
Nothing comes to mind.

Further details:

• I have reviewed the TAG's Web Platform Design Principles
• Relevant time constraints or deadlines: N/A
• 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: There are still debates around syntax, but it seems to mostly be falling into place.
• This work is being funded by: N/A

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

💬 leave review feedback as a comment in this issue and @-notify @sesse and @lilles