- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:08:14 -0800
- To: Zack Weinberg <zweinberg@mozilla.com>
- CC: W3C Emailing list for WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
Zack Weinberg wrote: > fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > >> # The negation pseudo-class, :not(X), is a functional notation >> # taking a simple selector (excluding the negation pseudo-class >> # itself) as an argument. It represents an element that is not >> # represented by the argument. >> # >> # Note: Since pseudo-elements are not simple selectors, they >> # are not a valid argument to :not(). > > I think the (excluding ...) parenthetical is still confusing, and would > suggest instead > > # The negation pseudo-class, :not(X), takes a single simple selector > # as an argument. It matches any element that its argument would not > # match. > # > # Negations may not be nested; :not(...:not(...)...) is invalid. > # Also, since pseudo-elements are not simple selectors, they may not > # be used inside :not() either. I have made the following changes: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/selectors3/Overview.html.diff?r1=1.65&r2=1.66&f=h Please let me know if this is an acceptable response to your comment. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 4 November 2009 23:09:16 UTC