Re: [css3-selectors] minor question about :not()

L. David Baron wrote:
> On Tuesday 2009-03-17 16:48 -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> There IS a conflict with implementations.  Both Gecko and Opera accept
>> "::first-letter" by itself as a valid selector.
> 
> I think this conflict (which is a bug in the spec in both selectors
> level 3 and in CSS 2.1, since it is an unintentional break in
> compatibility with CSS level 1) could be fixed without changing any
> terminology by changing:
>   # If the universal selector is not the only component of a
>   # sequence of simple selectors, the * may be omitted.
> in http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors3/#universal-selector to
> something like:
>   # If the universal selector is not the only component of a
>   # sequence of simple selectors or is followed by a pseudo-element,
>   # the * may be omitted.
> although I don't think that wording "followed by a pseudo-element"
> is quite precise enough.  We'd need an analogous change to
> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/selector.html#universal-selector to fix
> CSS 2.1.

I've inserted "or is immediately followed by a pseudo-element".
Please let me know if this is sufficient.

~fantasai