- From: Brandon McConnell via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2023 19:48:42 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I guess a quick workaround that would work for **_simpler_** `nth`-style expressions could just be…
```css
:nth-child(1) { --nth-child: 1; }
/* ... */
:nth-child(999) { --nth-child: 999; }
:nth-last-child(1) { --nth-last-child: 1; }
/* ... */
:nth-last-child(999) { --nth-last-child: 999; }
:nth-of-type(1) { --nth-of-type: 1; }
/* ... */
:nth-of-type(999) { --nth-of-type: 999; }
/* etc. */
```
Although, this could blow up your CSS size if you use some huge limit like 999.
---
Some official and more dynamic implementation of this idea could avoid all this and solved for iterable/incremental values in CSS.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by brandonmcconnell
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8981#issuecomment-1596248710 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 18 June 2023 19:48:44 UTC