W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2012

Re: [selectors5] Proposal for a pseudo combinator

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 16:37:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDB84S0Cnd25iFiyipaobPVzK7yc3u2GOC0x7NejR1zTFg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com
<mtanalin@yandex.ru> wrote:
> I always set default `background-repeat` to `no-repeat` via following rule:
>
>    *,
>    :before,
>    :after {background-repeat: no-repeat; }

This selector is identical under both current behavior and my
proposal. (It would become equivalent to "*, * :: before, * ::
after".)

> It's quite possible that it can then be overrided like:
>
>    .example :before {background-repeat: repeat-x; }

It's possible, but do you actually have that in your code?  It's kinda weird.

> Generated content is widely used currently, and this is _not_ rare or stupid. It's reality that should not be broken by a questionable syntax-improvement.

I didn't say that generated content is rare or stupid.


An additional note: I wouldn't carry over the quirk that a
single-colon works equally well.  I'd just make the single-colon forms
of the existing pseudos as a special-case and have them explicitly
keep their exact current meaning.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 5 April 2012 23:38:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:52 GMT