- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 11:03:06 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 6/9/11 10:56 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > It definitely wouldn't be a parse error. It would produce a selector > equivalent to "::after::before", which is just an invalid selector. That selector is a parse error, last I checked. Or are we using different definitions of "parse error"? > I'm inclined to make it a parse error to nest within a pseudoelement > selector. I'll mark this as an issue in the spec I write. OK. Sounds good. -Boris
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2011 18:03:46 UTC