W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2001

Re: New draft: css3-selectors

From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 19:36:33 -0500
Message-ID: <3A736991.49FFCC7D@escape.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
Bert Bos wrote:
> 
> The CSS working group has published a new draft:
> 
>     CSS3 module: W3C selectors
>     http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-css3-selectors-20010126

Re: 6.6.2 The target pseudo-class :target

I can see the usefulness of styling targets, but how is the UA to
know whether an element has been targeted or not? Anchors can be 
targeted from outside the document.


Re: 6.4.3 Default attribute values in DTDs

I can conclude from the example that either
  a) There is no mechanism for matching implicit attribute values
     and the example just illustrates a workaround.
or 
  b) The element selector, without an explicit attribute selector,
     matches only elements that have all attributes implicitly
     set to their default values. (Which is absurd.)

Moreover, the example seems to contradict the third sentence ("W3C 
selectors should be implemented so that they work even if the default 
values are not included in the document tree."), which to me implies 
that a selector "form[method=get]" will match 
<form action="script.cgi">

Am I reading this correctly? It's very confusing.


Re: 6.6.5 Structural pseudo-classes

 Re: :nth-___ pseudo-classes

  Syntax being as: :nth-child(an+b) where a and b are integers

  When you have an "nth-child", it implies that the child will
  be the nth child. In the parameter, n represents not the index 
  of the selected child, but a counter that increments by one 
  until an+b > number of children. Essentially, there are two 
  variables here--the index of the selected child(ren) and the 
  counter, both referred to as n.

  I doubt many people will analyze the syntax like that, but 
  I just thought I should bring it up...

  Aside from that, I think the syntax is much easier to follow
  than multiple parameters; certainly easier to remember. ^_^

 Re: :nth-last-___ psuedo-classes

  Am I correct in assuming that negative parameters to nth-____
  were deemed too mathmatical for CSS? IMO, using negative numbers
  is easier to remember than mulitple pseudo-classes, especially
  since they probably won't be very commonly used. Just a :last-___ 
  should be enough, no?

Re: 7. Pseudo-elements

  <blockquote>
  For compatibility reasons with existing stylesheets, user agents 
  must also accept the one-colon previous notation. This compatibility
  is not required for the new pseudo-elements introduced in CSS level 3.
  </blockquote>

Just for clarity, I'd recommend rewriting this as
  "For compatibility with existing stylesheets, user agents must also
   accept the previous one-colon notation for pseudo-elements introduced
   in CSS levels 1 and 2. This comatibility is not required for the new
   pseudo-elements introduced in CSS level 3."

It's a minor change, but you don't have to analyze the text as much
to get the gist of it.

Re: parent selector

  There doesn't seem to be a way of selecting the parent element or
  any of the other things allowed by the previous draft's :subject 
  modifier. I didn't get around to actually /reading/ the draft yet,
  so I might've missed it, but I think that if you're planning to put
  it in any version of CSS, you should introduce a subject modifier
  in this one; it probably won't get in the implementations for another
  five-ten years otherwise. =P


Re: column-child

  One thing I would really like to see is a way of selecting 
  descendants of table columns. Since CSS is based on the
  document tree, that's not possible, but.. *sigh* ~_~
Received on Saturday, 27 January 2001 19:35:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:07 GMT