On Feb 26, 2010, at 7:46 AM, fantasai wrote: >> So given a selector like: >> >> p:any(:hover,#mypara) >> >> Should this selector have: >> >> specificity 11 (p + :any) >> specificity 111 (p + :hover + #mypara) >> specificity 121 (p + :any + :hover + #mypara) >> specificity 11 (p + :hover) or 101 (p + #mypara) depending on how it >> matches (with 101 if it matches both ways)? >> one of 11 or 101, not depending on how it matches (just always the >> lowest or highest) >> >> I'd note that the next-to-last seems like it might be best, > > I agree. I think anything other than that would have surprising > cascade effects, and it would limit :any()'s usefulness for > shortening unweildy selectors. I agree also. On Feb 26, 2010, at 6:58 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > At least in Gecko's case, what you wrote above would indeed be more or less just syntax sugar. But this: > > :any(#authors, #publications) div > > would probably be faster to match than: > > #authors div, #publications div > > In fact, we're looking into implementing this right now (as :-moz-any()) to more efficiently deal with the numerous rules of this form that appear in our UA stylesheet. So you're not worried about people using this as a UA-selecting hack? body { rules for most UAs' body tag } :any(html) body { rules for this version of firefox or higher's body tag }
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:13:43 UTC