W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2009

Re: [css3-selectors] LC Issues #1

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:21:22 -0700
Message-ID: <4AD373A2.30200@inkedblade.net>
To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Anton Prowse wrote:
> Congratulations on a very solid-looking specification!
> 
> Here are the things that I noticed when reading through the document.
> (Trivial editorial issues are listed separately at the end.)
> 
> 
> 6.3. Attribute selectors
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-css3-selectors-20090310/#attribute-selectors)
> :
> 
>   # [att~=val]     Represents an element with the att attribute whose
>   # value is a whitespace-separated list of words, one of which is
>   # exactly "val". If "val" contains whitespace, it will never represent
>   # anything (since the words are separated by spaces). Also if "val" is
>   # the empty string, it will never represent anything.
> 
> Issue 1:  Intuitively one might expect that if "val" were the empty
> string it would represent an element with the att attribute whose value
> is the empty string, rather than fail to represent anything.  (HTML5
> currently proposes that <img>, <img alt=""> and <img alt="bar"> have
> different semantics, for example, and so there is a use case for such
> matching.)  If such matching is truly not permitted, perhaps it is worth
> explicitly stating that.  (The equivalent situation with the
> substring-matching attribute selectors seems reasonable as specified,
> however.)

See bz's response:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0153.html

I'm going to close this issue as no change. Please let me know if you
object.

~fantasai
Received on Monday, 12 October 2009 18:22:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:21 GMT