- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 21:28:53 -0700
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style@w3.org
----- Original Message ----- From: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org> To: <www-style@w3.org> Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2006 7:52 PM Subject: allowed arguments to :not() (was Re: Selector for parent/predecessor?) >On Sunday 2006-08-20 12:39 +1000, Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> :not() can only contain a simple selector. In other words, it cannot >> contain any combinators. >> >> e.g. These are valid: >> :not(foo) >> :not(foo[bar]) >> :not(foo:hover) > >Actually, only the first is valid. (The definition of "simple selector" >changed between CSS2 and css3-selectors.) David, is there any reasons of such :not simplifactaion? I have implemented ':not' for any arbitrary selector and would say that technically (means effectively) :not can contain any selector. Is there [ideo]logical limitations I am not aware of ? Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Sunday, 20 August 2006 04:29:52 UTC