- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:18:55 -0800
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20050126001855.GA13122@ridley.dbaron.org>
On Tuesday 2005-01-25 15:59 -0800, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: > For example: > <select> element (list box) is "focusable" element but its <options> are not. > Being in focus, <select> has one current item (option) which is visually distinct from others. The selected option should probably match the :checked pseudo-class. A SELECT is logically pretty much the same thing as a radio group. > I mean it is lack of "containment" selectors like: > > P < DIV - any <div> which contains <p> > * < DIV - non empty div > OPTION:focus < SELECT - select having option in focus. These have been discussed extensively on this list and one proposal was in early drafts of css3-selectors. Search for ":subject" (the one that was in css3-selectors), ":has", and ":matches". The problem is that they're all difficult to implement effeciently in the processing model used for CSS selectors (used via a function that maps (element, selector) -> boolean). (The two bits of your message that I quoted seem like two entirely separate issues, although the middle of the message seemed to connect them in a way that I didn't understand.) -David -- L. David Baron <URL: http://dbaron.org/ >
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2005 00:19:28 UTC