W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > May 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] [selectors3] better terminology for ~ sibling combinator?

From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 18:15:57 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-301869440-1494958555-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Tangent: you have an interesting notion of "recent", @dbaron, since that edit was from 2012. ^_^

@dbaron: Are you okay with @SelenIT's suggestion of subsequent? I think it suffers from the same problem as "following", but it's my favorite suggested so far, at least. ^_^

I'm unsure that *any* single word would solve your concern 100% unambiguously; they can all be interpreted as "the immediate sibling" as well.  We'd have to go with multiple words to be fully unambiguous, I think.

That said, I do think the words we are using now are a definite improvement over the pre-2012 terminology of "adjacent" and "general", which don't convey directionality.

GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1382#issuecomment-301869440 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 16 May 2017 18:16:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:12 UTC