- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:17:59 +0200
- To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: "Ryan Seddon" <seddon.ryan@gmail.com>, "Mounir Lamouri" <mounir.lamouri@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:38:32 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 2:19 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> > wrote: >> You previously stated that it would be up to the user agent to determine >> when the pseudo-class would match. I do not think that is a good idea. I >> would also like to keep :valid paired with :invalid. Whether we do >> :<x>:invalid or :<x>-invalid/:invalid-<x> I do not really care about. > > It sounds like the difference between what you are proposing, and the > :ui-invalid proposal that I'm making, is that your proposing a > specified set of rules that :<x> or :<x>-invalid should match, rather > than leaving it up to the UA. Is this correct? Right. I also want to keep :invalid the way it is. > If so, it sounds good, but I wonder if it will really work in practice > unless all UAs agrees to use the same rules for invalid markers and > thus all would have use for the :<x>/:<x>-invalid selector. Until we figure that out it could be a proprietary extension I suppose. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 28 September 2010 11:18:34 UTC