W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2014

Re: [selectors4][css-syntax] Pseudo-elements vs. combinators

From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:42:51 -0500
Message-ID: <CADC=+jdezYazoSGp+5KFHVQb71808Mdj_pgp1YuC80QyGKuGMg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
Cc: "Tab Atkins, Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
On Feb 5, 2014 6:40 AM, "Simon Sapin" <simon.sapin@exyr.org> wrote:
>
> 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
>

Just out of curiosity, is there a reason other than "its really close to
what's there" to pick ^?  I'm not trying to gum up the works but I feel
like someone should at least attempt to play devil's advocate since
combinators are a pretty rare add.  The only issues I can think of are
that: ^ is already a valid part of attribute selectors - and it would mean
something really different, and it looks like "up" which might be why it
plays it's role in regex too.  In any case, given the constant use in the
community of the term "parent selector" it's plausible that this could be
misunderstood.  So I guess the question is why not pick something else with
no ambiguity or implication..  slashes aren't used,  ampersand isn't used,
tilde isn't used - are any of them better choices?
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 13:43:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:18 UTC