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

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

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 07:38:32 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCQB4ApzJdt=7b-W7HfFn+uB0-tqdD+sM5ZePPubsE5WA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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?

Nah, it's more or less arbitrary.

Slashes were used for the ref combinator, though we're punting that
and might not do it at all.

Ampersand is used in preprocessors for nested rules, and I'd like to
reserve it for that future use.

Tilde is indeed used -
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors/#general-sibling-combinators

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 15:39:23 UTC

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