Re: selector negation (was Re: New version of the Selectors module of CSS3)

Matthew Brealey wrote:

> Precisely one argument - one simple selector. Cause !:first-child is
> not as nicely wrapped up as :!(:first-child). I did consider :not(),
> but I preferred the briefer syntax.

Sorry, but I do not support (I mean not *at all*) this courageous
attempt to add smileys :!( to W3C selectors.


Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free address at

Received on Tuesday, 10 October 2000 12:27:48 UTC