Re: :invalid

On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:12:59 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> This doesn't really change much, if anything, of my arguments
> previously in the thread though.
>
> At that point why not also add "and is invalid" to the set of
> requirements for matching this new pseduo class and make it actually
> useful in and of itself?

You previously stated that it would be up to the user agent to determine  
when the pseudo-class would match. I do not think that is a good idea. I  
would also like to keep :valid paired with :invalid. Whether we do  
:<x>:invalid or :<x>-invalid/:invalid-<x> I do not really care about.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/