- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 11:38:24 +0000
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
- CC: "<www-style@w3.org>" <www-style@w3.org>
On 05/02/2014 05:46, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com> wrote: >> So just like >> >> ::<name> indicates a pseudo-element, >> :<name> indicates a pseudo-class, >> >> we'd have >> >> <combinator-prefix><name> indicate a combinator. > > […] > > How about using ^? +1 to ^<name> (eg. ^shadow and ^shadow-all) for new combinators. My main issue with bare ^ and ^^ combinators is that they don’t have a name apparent in syntax, but only assign arbitrary meaning to random ASCII characters. ^<name> would also fix David’s searchability concern, if we pick names that are non-ambiguous enough. -- Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 11:38:50 UTC