- From: Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:56:53 -0700
- To: "Francois Remy" <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
- Cc: "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
On Jul 25, 2008, at 8:20 AM, Francois Remy wrote:
> From: "Brad Kemper" <brkemper@comcast.net>
>> On Jul 24, 2008, at 10:01 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>> Second:
>>>
>>> Consider these two selectors:
>>>
>>> p
>>> {
>>> border: none;
>>> }
>>>
>>> html:with-child(a:hover) p
>>> {
>>> border: 2em;
>>> }
>>>
>>> and markup:
>>>
>>> <html>
>>> <p><a href="*">sample</a></p>
>>> </html>
>> As far as I can tell, nothing would happen there, because the HTML
>> element does not have an anchor ("A" element) as a child. It only
>> has one as a descendant, and I thought "with-child" referred to
>> immediate children only, not grandchildren.
>
> No with-child refers to grandchildren too.
> But it's possible that the name is bad choosen.
>
> Fremy
Well then, I think we should consider single generation version of
this idea, especially if it will make it faster. Most of the use cases
involve just children, not all descendants. In fact, I think it would
be more useful if it had the more limited scope of just immediate
children.
Consider the following:
div:with-child(code) { border:2px solid #999; background-color:beige; }
div:with-child(code):before { content:"See Code:"; }
I would only want this on DIVs that surrounded the Code block
directly, not on any old DIV that happened to be an ancestor of the
code block. I can really see no use case for a "has-child" pseudo-
class to look at all descendants.
Received on Friday, 25 July 2008 15:57:48 UTC