- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 13:22:17 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 09/30/2011 11:17 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 00:59:55 +0200, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >> Selectors 3 :not() did not accept compound selectors, so the second suggestion won't work. >> >> How should we represent the fact that there was a :not() in Selectors 3 that had a more limited syntax? > > Can people not just look at Selectors 3 for that? No need to keep all the historical > baggage I think. We are not doing that for CSS modules either. People want to know what's new; this (informative) table is attempting to summarize that information. (And yes, I have gotten requests for this information, it's not just me thinking it's a good idea.) ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 3 October 2011 20:22:57 UTC