Re: Previous-sibling combinator

On Jan 27, 2012 5:46 PM, "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
wrote:
>    P - UL > LI
>    :matches(!UL + P) > LI

Though it's a bit silly, it occurs to me to note that the previous-sibling
selector isn't a cure-all. What if you want to refer to the ul in your
example? You need something like:

p - !ul > li
or
p + ul:has(> li)

Damn. I used to be a fan of the ! indicator, but I think I just talked
myself out of it...