- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2010 10:24:41 +0200
- To: "www-style@w3.org CSS" <www-style@w3.org>
Estelle Weyl wrote: > img[src*=photo]:nth-of-type(odd) > > is selecting every odd image in the document, then checking to see if > the attribute has the word photo. > Is that correct according to the spec? Yes. "Type" refers to elements name. (Cf. the type selector: "A type selector is the name of a document language element type written using the syntax of CSS qualified names. A type selector represents an instance of the element type in the document tree."[1]) Indeed, the :nth-of-type(an+b) pseudo-class notation "represents an element that has an+b-1 siblings with the same expanded element name before it in the document tree, for any zero or positive integer value of n, and has a parent element."[2] > My assumption is that :nth-of-type, being a pseudo-class, has greater > specificity than the attribute selector, but then shouldn't the :not > pseudo have equal weight? I reversed the order, nothing seems to work. "Specificity" isn't the right term here (it has another meaning in CSS Selectors [3]) but I understand what you're asking. However, there is no universal common behaviour of pseudo-classes as regards their interaction with other parts of the sequence of simple selectors to which they belong. Hence we must turn to the definition of the :not pseudo-class to discover its behaviour: "The negation pseudo-class, :not(X), is a functional notation taking a simple selector (excluding the negation pseudo-class itself) as an argument. It represents an element that is not represented by its argument."[4] So, in the sense you mean, the :not pseudo-class does behave differently from the :nth-of-type pseudo-class in that the whole of the simple selector argument is taken into consideration. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#type-selectors [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#nth-of-type-pseudo [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#specificity [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#negation Cheers, Anton Prowse http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Sunday, 4 July 2010 08:26:07 UTC