- From: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:51:02 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "Robert O'Callahan" <rocallahan@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <BANLkTinvrgKR0kd6ajr7-BxGaWdjBRJFEA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:13 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>wrote: > On 06/16/2011 07:58 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote: > >> I think we should rename :matches to :any. >> >> 1. :matches, doesn't make clear the "or" relationship that :any does. I >> could >> easily interpret :matches to mean that it matches all of the selectors >> instead of any one of them. >> 2. Two browser vendors already ship :any (vendor prefixed of course). >> 3. :any is less typing and fewer bytes to ship down the wire. >> > > I chose "matches" over "any" because > 1. it contrasts with :not() which is the negation of the exact same > functionality > 2. it allows expansion to a full :matches() implementation, where a full > :matches() > implementation is that :matches() takes any selector (including those > with > combinators); calling it :any() implies there has to be more than one > argument > for it to be useful, which is the case now, but would not be for a full > version > > Basically, I think about this as > :not(selector) > :matches(selector) > where selector can include commas, as per usual (rather than as > I think I'm a bit confused on terminology here. I don't think of selectors as allowing commas. I think of that as a selector group as per http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors4/#grouping. Terminology aside, I don't think many web developers think of a comma-separated list of selectors as a single selector. Similarly, querySelectorAll doesn't take a comma-separated list, right? It would be nice if it did, but I think that ship has sailed. Boris, Rob, you have opinions on this? I don't feel strongly about this. I'm not opposed to changing WebKit if Gecko changes as well, but I still prefer :any to :matches. Ojan > :not(selector, selector) > :any(selector, selector) > where it can't). > > Does that make sense now or still not? :)
Received on Friday, 17 June 2011 17:51:47 UTC