On 6/17/11 10:19 AM, Brian Kardell wrote: > In reading verbiage of the draft and the comments - is that to say that > would be valid or invalid? > > div:matches(p) That's no different from div:not(div). It's a valid selector that matches no elements. > It seems to be that it would it be effectively the same as: > > !div p It wouldn't be, actually. -BorisReceived on Friday, 17 June 2011 17:01:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:41 GMT