On Aug 5, 2014 11:04 AM, "Benjamin Poulain" <bpoulain@apple.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I am starting to look into Selectors Level 4 and I would like to understand the rationale behind some design choices of :not(): > -Why is there limitations on the nesting of :not() with other functional pseudo classes? The combinations ":matches(:not(...))", :not(:matches(...)) or :not(not()) seem useful for authors and easy to implement. > -Why take a selector list as the argument? This seems to be equivalent to :not(:matches(...)) while providing a more complicated syntax. > Can you explain the last bullet with examples? I'm thinking I must be misunderstanding what you are sayingReceived on Tuesday, 5 August 2014 15:14:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:45 UTC