W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2014

Re: [selectors4][css-syntax] Pseudo-elements vs. combinators

From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 10:52:25 -0500
Message-ID: <CADC=+jeA16g1-5g63M-AN2syWsSX7pTXJHP+hxnZGBvWMPp4Tg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins, Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
On Feb 5, 2014 10:38 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just out of curiosity, is there a reason other than "its really close to
> > what's there" to pick ^?  I'm not trying to gum up the works but I feel
> > someone should at least attempt to play devil's advocate since
> > are a pretty rare add.  The only issues I can think of are that: ^ is
> > already a valid part of attribute selectors - and it would mean
> > really different, and it looks like "up" which might be why it plays
> > role in regex too.  In any case, given the constant use in the
community of
> > the term "parent selector" it's plausible that this could be
> > So I guess the question is why not pick something else with no
ambiguity or
> > implication..  slashes aren't used,  ampersand isn't used,  tilde isn't
> > - are any of them better choices?
> Nah, it's more or less arbitrary.
> Slashes were used for the ref combinator, though we're punting that
> and might not do it at all.
> Ampersand is used in preprocessors for nested rules, and I'd like to
> reserve it for that future use.
> Tilde is indeed used -
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors/#general-sibling-combinators
> ~TJ

Crap... Yeah i don't know why i said  tilde i meant to say ` ... TIL Don't
mail the list before you finish your first cup of coffee I guess.
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 15:53:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:39 UTC