Brandon McConnell

Yeah, I'm all for that! With that in mind, maybe this could actually work using something as simple as a special HTML attribute that browsers will require elements to have...

Circling back to this as it's been a while since the last activity. Are there any steps I can take to push this proposal forward, along with its related dependency...

I [originally proposed `fallback()`](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5055#issuecomment-1278293274) but have grown to appreciate the verbosity of `first-supported()` as its meaning is unmistakable, though I agree that something like `fallback()` or `prefer()` would be a...

@romainmenke @fantasai With that change, how could one target a selector dependant on ***not*** having a specific selector before it? Some examples: ```scss .b:is(.a ~ &) { ... } .b:is(.a...

Another consideration… >**TL;DR:** Any way to achieve the effect of the below example without using nesting, now that `&` cannot be used to reference the selector `:is`, `:where`, or `:has`...

@tabatkins No worries. My two questions, put more succinctly and clearly (I hope) are… * If `&` will now refer to `:root` instead of the current element when used in...

@tabatkins @Loirooriol @mirisuzanne Incredible feedback. Thank you all so much for clearing up both of those questions! 🙌🏼 Wrapping only the unsupported selector or pseudo in the `:is()` ist a...

Circling back to this as it's been a while since the last activity. Are there any steps I can take to push this proposal forward, along with its related dependent...

@konung Just wanted to follow up here. If you can make that change I mentioned, I'll go ahead and merge this into my repo.

Duplicates #9