- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 18:45:25 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Henrik Andersson <henke@henke37.cjb.net>, Clive Chan <doobahead@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> On Feb 3, 2015, at 8:17 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > > That said, I'm not certain this should be a combinator at all. We can > instead put :has() in the fast profile if we limit it to only > containing + (and > ?) combinators. I'm for that, but I'd add the "following sibling" combinator (~) also, to get everything that has subsequent siblings. That should be no worse that +. Then to get something that has any P siblings, you would do this: :matches(:has(*~P), P~*) And these two would be equivalent: :matches(:has(*~), ~*) :not(:only-child)
Received on Sunday, 8 February 2015 02:45:52 UTC