W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [css-selectors] Proposal: Logical Combinators / Sets

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 10:47:23 -0700
Message-ID: <516302AB.4000908@inkedblade.net>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 04/06/2013 03:27 AM, Simon Sapin wrote:
> Le 06/04/2013 01:05, Brian Kardell a écrit :
>> Let me make a couple of points (some of them restated from post and article):
>>    -  These are only significant (useful/necessary) if all of them can
>> take complex selectors
>>     - :matches and :not are already in there and they probably map to
>> two of these, but neither takes complex selectors yet.
>
> I agree that complex selectors and :not() and :matches() would be great
> to have. Apparently so does Tab, who edited Selectors  4 just two days
> ago to add that.

It was always intended for :matches() to take complex selectors. They
weren't included only because of concerns about whether anyone would
implement them.

(Btw, technically, those edits were drafted by both of us; Tab's just
the one who usually runs the computer when we're pair-editing together.
If you see a bunch of emails signed TJ+fantasai, it's because we're
drafting it (and any concurrent spec edits) together!)

~fantasai
Received on Monday, 8 April 2013 17:47:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:10 UTC