- From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:27:25 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > > >> That said, ":first-word" would be a one-off. I'd be much more > >> interested in a ":first-n-words" and ":first-n-letters". > > That should be ::first-words(n) and ::first-letters(n) otherwise it > would be hard to read. I must say, I don't really like this pollution > with selectors. Hm, there are a lot of selectors selecting 'first', > 'last' and 'nth' and especially 'child', i.e. [1] > > E:first-child > E:last-child > E:only-child > E:nth-child(expr) > E:nth-last-child(expr) > > E:nth-last-of-type(expr) > E:nth-of-type(expr) > E:first-of-type > E:last-of-type > > So we have 6 methods (remember the child combinator) to select distinct > kinds of children of an element. Is this really necessary? I could live > with > > e:child(first) > e:child(last) > e:child(only) > e:child(even) > e:child(odd) > e:child(4n+4) > > or > > ... > e:children(even) > e:children(odd) > e:children(4n+4) > > if readability is an important issue. > > I don't know if it is possible to express nth-last-child with this > nn+/-x-Syntax but I can live without that selector :) See fantasai. "On nth-child, etc..", www-style. 2001-03-10 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2001Mar/0078.html and ensuing thread. > :first-child could be marked deprecated and kept for compatibility > reasons. > > Another approach would be to express the nth-thing in another way to > have a generic mechanism to select nth-words, nth-lines, nth-children, > nth-etceteras... I have to think about that... Actually, I kinda like the :child(expr) syntax. :) It's come up before, too... The problem with generalizing the syntax for words, lines, children, etc., is that it will obscure the semantics of the pseudo-class. There already /is/ a generic mechanism for specifying a pseudo-class--the colon. The fact that all these pseudo-classes have the same form is no reason to abstract the syntax another level. > What does > > elem:not(elem::first-line)::first-line { } > > select? Do typographic pseudo-classes and -elements apply to concat'ed > element content or to the context of the current selection? I believe you're only allowed to take a psuedo-element of the selected element. http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#pseudo-elements
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 17:25:44 UTC