- From: Peter Moulder <pjrm@mail.internode.on.net>
- Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 08:29:57 +1100
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 03:55:54AM +0000, Sylvain Galineau wrote: > ... I have heard a few times: "We should stop adding combinators and use pseudo-elements instead". > ... > > One suggestion would be to allow future combinators to be mnemonics or even words; we'd presumably need to agree on a common prefix for them to disambiguate them for elements. > > So just like > > ::<name> indicates a pseudo-element, > :<name> indicates a pseudo-class, > > we'd have > > <combinator-prefix><name> indicate a combinator. The CSS 2.1 parsing rules (section 4.1.7 paragraph 4 and following) say that if any comma-separated component of a ruleset's selectors is not valid CSS 2.1, then the whole ruleset must be dropped. This seems to be true of css-syntax / css-selectors-4 too (except that the comma-separated components have slightly looser requirements than CSS 2.1, e.g. having some additional combinators). This suggests that the best choice of <combinator-prefix> is actually ‘:’. (Which almost brings us back to where we started.) pjrm.
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2014 21:30:25 UTC