W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > February 2008

Re: [selectors-api] Selectors API comments: section 2

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:57:09 -0800
Message-ID: <47BE8055.3090604@sicking.cc>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, Web APIs WG <public-webapi@w3.org>

Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:31:50 +0100, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>> I do sort of think that it's a pity to disallow a selectors 
>> implementation in a browser from implementing additional selectors on 
>> top of the ones in the CSS implementation, for example for the reasons 
>> Boris mentioned. I don't feel very strongly about it, but I'm 
>> wondering what the rationale for forbidding it is.
> 
> So that the "API" stays consistent. If a new selector comes up that only 
> makes sense in either we can always revisit this approach.

So for what it's worth I just ran into a selector that basically only 
makes sense in a JS API but not in CSS. Apparently some javascript 
toolkits support a :hidden selector that only matches elements which 
matches elements that aren't displayed (presumably they or a parent are 
display:none or visibility:hidden). Such a selector would never work in 
CSS as it causes circular dependencies, but seems to be popular in 
javascript.

http://ejohn.org/blog/selectors-that-people-actually-use/

The selectors spec doesn't currently define such a selector so it's not 
really an issue now, but it might be in the future.

/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 22 February 2008 07:57:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 February 2008 07:57:05 GMT