On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Nikita Popov <privat@ni-po.com> wrote: > Am 08.01.2010 19:25, schrieb Tab Atkins Jr.: >> >> You could avoid that with: >> >> .page form :any(form> input, label select) {} >> > > Could I? > > I think your selector would be resolved in > .page form form > input, > .page form label select > which is different from what I meant with the "> input": > .page form > input, > .page form label select Nope, the :any (or :matches) pseudoclass matches any element that matches one of the selectors passed in. So this: .page form :matches(form > input, label select) Should be in english as "Any (input that's a child of a form) or (select that's a descendant of a label), in a form, in an element with class=page. (Parens added for disambiguation - English doesn't handle arbitrary nesting well.) > Actually, the missing space was not a typo, but I thought that > .page form :any(>input, ...) > would be > .page form *:any(>input, ...) > would be > .page form * > input > which wasn't my original intention ( .page form > input) That's why we shouldn't allow bare combinators at the beginning, if we allow complex selectors. It's rather confusing to resolve properly. > I think this pseudo-class stuff isn't as easy as it looks with complex > selectors. Complex selectors are never easy, and it just gets worse when you break from the simple descent of a standard selector and start allowing more arbitrary nesting. ^_^ ~TJReceived on Friday, 8 January 2010 19:34:47 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:31 UTC