Re: :target [via CSS Selectors as Fragment Identifiers Community Group]

At 11:46 +0100 3/8/12, Robin Berjon wrote:

>On Mar 5, 2012, at 16:56 , Eric A. Meyer wrote:

>>  At 16:05 +0100 3/5/12, Chris Lilley wrote:
>>>  RB>  It won't be the only one, for instance I'm not
>>>  RB> sure what :scope would do, or :hover for that matter.
>>>
>>>  The user-interaction ones like :hover are already disallowed by 
>>>the draft spec.
>>
>>    My feeling is that the spec should explicitly permit structural 
>>pseudo-classes, :not, and :lang.
>
>I can think of a few others, for instance :matches and :dir, plus 
>all the nth-* and friends ones. I wonder if the :column ones could 
>be useful for horizontal scrollers.

    All the :nth-* selectors (and friends) are the structural 
pseudo-selectors I mentioned.
    I left out :matches, :dir(), and the column selectors because 
they're still in the CSS4 selectors Editor's Draft and may well 
change.  Basically I limited myself to CSS3 selectors for reasons of 
stability.
    This is why I prefer listing what's permitted, by the way.  It 
establishes a known baseline that can be expanded later, as opposed 
to a possibly expanding set of unexcluded things that might have to 
be further restricted.

>>    I may have argued otherwise in the past, can't remember now, but 
>>I feel like the UI element states are similar enough in concept to 
>>the dynamic states that they should be disallowed together.
>
>Hmmm, how about linking to the first form element that's not 
>:disabled? Or those that are :invalid?

    I considered those, but they don't feel like reasonable use cases 
to me.  I'm certainly willing to be argued out of that view.

-- 
Eric A. Meyer (eric@meyerweb.com)     http://meyerweb.com/

Received on Thursday, 8 March 2012 14:46:43 UTC