W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > July 2018

Re: [csswg-drafts] [selectors4] Name the “functional pseudo-class like :matches() with 0 specificity”

From: Ilya Streltsyn via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 17:38:10 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-404902655-1531503489-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
What about `:and()`? It's short, it seems intuitive (a conjunction of two conditions, the target element should match both main _and_ additional part), but in the same time it separates the selector into the non-parenthesized and parenthesized parts, implying that the latter is "special" (so its specificity might 
be not counted as usually).

Though it might look a bit odd in the beginning of the selector, the general rule that absence of the elemental selector means `*` should help to understand the intent to express the selector that has the specificity of the universal selector (i.e. zero) _and_ still selects only specific elements...

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by SelenIT
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2143#issuecomment-404902655 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 13 July 2018 17:38:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 13 July 2018 17:38:20 UTC