W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2004

Re: [proposal] Table cell selectors.

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@iinet.net.au>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 23:32:12 +1100
Message-ID: <4197504C.6090600@iinet.net.au>
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
CC: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, www-style Mailing List <www-style@w3.org>

Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
> Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>> Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>> E[@column=number @row=number]
>>>
>>> Matches any table cell located at column number and row number.
>>
>> What happens with
>>   E[@column=1 @row=1] {
>>     display: block;
>>   }
> 
> Boris, seems I do not understand your question well....
> First child of first row of table (inline-table) element will become block 
> instead of table-cell.

Since your selector only selects table cells, once the element is no 
longer a table cell, then that selector would no longer apply, thus it 
would return to being a table cell, thus creating an infinite loop of 
being a table cell, and not being a table cell.  At least, that's my 
(possibly incorrect) interpretation of the problem.

> This is just a short form of
> table tr[@index=1] td[@index=1]
> 
> or following CSS 3 proposal you've mentioned (btw,thanks!)
> table:nth-child(1):nth-child(1)

No, you've misunderstood the :nth-child() pseudo-class.  Your proposal 
seems to be roughly equivalent to this.

   table tr:nth-child(1) td:nth-child(1)

-- 
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
http://GetFirefox.com/    Rediscover the Web
http://SpreadFirefox.com/   Igniting the Web
Received on Sunday, 14 November 2004 12:32:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:34 GMT