- From: Richard Gibson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:38:52 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
We both agree that `:is()` and `:not()` make a better nonzero-specificity pair than `:matches()` and `:not()` and that it would be good to rename `:matches()` to `:is()` if possible. I also make the further claim that even if `:matches()` _cannot_ be renamed, the semantic value of the `:is()`+`:not()` pair is sufficiently high to introduce `:is()` anyway, and further to recast `:matches()` as a (deprecated) alias thereof (i.e., `:is()` as the preferred spelling and the primary entity in documentation). -- GitHub Notification of comment by gibson042 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3258#issuecomment-433645029 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 27 October 2018 18:38:53 UTC