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. / JonasReceived 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