- From: Matthew Wilcox <elvendil@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:14:31 +0000
- To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Cc: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Message-ID: <CAMCRKiJy9nywo44cM_bDc1tWJnYD8phCzzC+j9reLQrEL-1Qig@mail.gmail.com>
I'd read ! as not, in fact I just did reviewing the thread. It even made me frown in confusion. On 26 January 2012 11:31, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes ,I understand the theory behind it. However, theory and practice are > two different things. As I said last year, in a quick straw poll of half a > dozen or so folks who use css on a daily basis, literally every one of them > thought that examples from the list, wiki and draft that I provided meant > "not". > > Maybe it is just something that has to be well explained (I would > definitely add to the draft in that respect if kept) ... I don't want to > lead this back into a huge discussion unless it is really time to have it. > My whole point there is merely that if there is any risk of causing > additional confusion, why not just pick another. > On Jan 26, 2012 4:34 AM, "Lea Verou" <leaverou@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 26/1/12 02:08, Brian Kardell wrote: >> >>> Yes, I recall that ... and several people read ! as "not" which is where >>> ? came from I think. Its bike shedding to an extent, I admit, but I >>> don't think without value to discard problematic ideas early on in favor >>> of less problematic ones.... >>> >>> >> ! as "not" is a prefix operator, not a postfix one, as the one currently >> defined in the selectors4 draft. So, FWIW I don't think there's going to be >> any such confusion. >> >> I actually thought it's a great idea that it was changed to a ! since >> that's what we use in natural language too in order to highlight something >> important. >> >> >> -- >> Lea Verou (http://lea.verou.me | @LeaVerou) >> >
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 12:14:59 UTC