W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 1997

RE: Selector Readabiliitiy [sic]

From: Andrew n marshall <amarshal@usc.edu>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 10:18:39 -0800
Message-ID: <01BD0167.376028F0.amarshal@usc.edu>
To: "'Douglas Rand'" <drand@sgi.com>
Cc: "'www-style@w3.org'" <www-style@w3.org>

Try these...

On Friday, December 05, 1997 7:58 AM, Douglas Rand [SMTP:drand@sgi.com] 
wrote:
> No,  it doesn't.  If I have a tree where DIV.Chapter has a number
> of children,  e.g. a table,  I might want to write selectors like
> this:
>
> DIV.Chapter P:child[TD] { ... }

Current spec:
   DIV.Chapter TD ~ P {...}
My spec (same):
   DIV.Chapter TD ~ P {...}

> DIV.Chapter P:child[DIV.Chapter] { ... }

Current Spec:
   DIV.Chapter ~ P, DIV.Chapter DIV.Chapter ~ P {...}
although I doubt the second case was intended, your notation does include 
it.
My spec (same):
   DIV.Chapter ~ P, DIV.Chapter DIV.Chapter ~ P {...}

> DIV.Chapter P:first-child[DIV.Chapter] { ... }

Current spec;
   DIV.Chapter ~ //P/, DIV.Chapter DIV.Chapter ~ //P/ {...}
Again, your notation accidently include the second case.
David's/My spec:
   DIV.Chapter ~ P:first, DIV.Chapter DIV.Chapter ~ P:first {...}
This actually isn't exactly correct since David's notation specifies 'first 
of it's kind'.  Maybe there is a need for both pseudo-classes ":first" and 
":first-child".  Thoughts?

> That is one of the reasons that the / stuff is awkward to me.  I
> think it is extremely reasonable to have arbitrary qualifiers.
> An example:
>
> P:child[TD]:grandchild[TR.special] { ... }

Current spec:
   TR.special ~ TD ~ P {...}
My spec (same):
   TR.special ~ TD ~ P {...}

> Of course the whole thing can get out of hand.  But you get the
> idea of the sorts of things that might be nice to do.  I suspect
> that child and sibling relationships,  along with some sort of
> child count constraint (at least first and last and not first or last)
> would be sufficient.

The fact that your notation can get out of hand is plenty of reason not to 
use it.  I think your biggest problem is in realizing ancestoral 
relationship occur ancestor to descendant, left to right, just like in 
CSS-1, but now there is the possibility to qualify an immediate 
relationship (child).

Andrew n marshall
  student - artist - programmer
    http://www.media-electronica.com/anm-bin/anm
      "Everyone a mentor,  Everyone a pupil"
Received on Friday, 5 December 1997 13:14:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:53 GMT