- From: Guillaume via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2023 06:18:31 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Ok, I got it, thanks. `&type` and `type&` are equivalent, even if `&` represents `*` or `type`. `&.class` and `.class&` are equivalent, even if `&` represents `type`. But `&::pseudo` and `::pseudo&` are never equivalent, whatever `&` represents. Fortunately, I think authors will always choose the position of `&` as if it were a macro, even if it is not. -- GitHub Notification of comment by cdoublev Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7503#issuecomment-1445278226 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 26 February 2023 06:18:33 UTC