- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 17:08:44 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org> wrote: >> That's still true if you use ::host, what is the thing on the left hand side >> the ::host lives on? I'm not aware of any pseudo element that's not >> connected to another element such that you couldn't write {thing}::pseudo. > > ::selection? ::selection has a host element. If you use it by itself it just means you're selecting *::selection. > But maybe you're right and the whole > pseudo-class/pseudo-element distinction is rather meaningless. But at > least pseudo-class til date made some sense. I still don't understand what you find wrong with this. It's not that ":host() [can] match an element that cannot otherwise be matched", it's that the host element element is featureless, save for the ability to match :host. (That's the definition of a featureless element - it's allowed to specify particular things that can still match it.) In other words, it's not :host that's magical, it's the host element itself that's magical. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2015 00:09:32 UTC