W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2008

RE: [CSSWG] Resolutions 2008-02-26

From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:20:24 -0700
To: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
cc: www-style@w3.org, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Message-ID: <20080402042024.f8d1e42eb1f8db40312f41775502f7f0.c9b81ad470.wbe@email.secureserver.net>

I wrote:


> Can I please seek clarification about attribute substring selectors with empty strings.
> 
> [att^=val]
> 
> [att$=val]
> 
> [att*=val]
> 
> 
> You (CSSWG) are saying that these are (now declared) valid but match 'nothing'. 
> The existing implementations that support such attribute substrings show all the 
> above as matching except for the last [att*=val] with one implementation. As I 
> understand the retraction of Resolutions 2008-02-26 would indicate that now all 
> implementations must change their existing behavior. Is this correct?
> 
> I will support whatever is decided but I would like to know precisely what is 
> being changed or what is being kept as current implementations behavior.


I should add that these wildcard attribute selectors with negation.


:not([att^=val])
:not([att$=val])
:not([att*=val])


which currently "match nothing" in all implementations supporting negation. If the implementations change their behavior with those earlier cases (without negation) then all implementations will show the above three selectors when changed as a match (like green).


http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Feb/0333.html

Alan

http://css-class.com/test/
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2008 11:21:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:03 GMT