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

Re: [selectors4][naming] Renaming :matches() (was: Proposal: Logical Combinators / Sets)

From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 14:08:49 -0400
Message-ID: <CADC=+jeGVvu9HbyRaiTisF6-mggrv+pc7JEafQOMQSWnypqXgw@mail.gmail.com>
To: liam@w3.org
Cc: Lea Verou <lea@w3.org>, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>, www-style@w3.org
On Apr 8, 2013 2:02 PM, "Liam R E Quin" <liam@w3.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2013-03-24 at 16:15 -0400, Brian Kardell wrote:
> > On Mar 24, 2013 3:39 PM, "Lea Verou" <lea@w3.org> wrote:
>
> > > Has the idea of :and() been discussed?
> [...]
> > That is an interesting idea...i see the rationale because CSS gives us
> > comma to OR selectors together. Having said that it feels strange to
have
> > :and do an OR just for the fact that you have to explain it that way.
>
> Maybe :where() would be more neutral? Or maybe that's my query
> background showing, I'm not sure.
>
> Liam
>
There too, i get it, but i think where is overloaded in a system that is
about rendering and for those without sql sort of experience probably more
confusing than matches ultimately.

> --
> Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
> Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
> Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml
>
Received on Monday, 8 April 2013 18:09:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 8 April 2013 18:09:23 UTC