- From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:20:31 -0500
- To: Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 21:21:00 UTC
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru> wrote: > 12.02.2014, 00:55, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>: > > I've just posted the selector syntax survey I was charged with at the > > last f2f: > https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1x0eXPBj1GN8Zau-7k9J_JGhoM6uGEqlJBkBBDFswT2w/viewform > > > > This will help us decide whether to use the subject indicator or the > > :has() pseudoclass. Please answer and share this poll! > > Looks like a false dichotomy. As far as I understand, the subject selector > is not capable of all things that `:has()` is capable of. > > If to choose anyway, then, of course, `:has()` is preferred since it > allows (at least potentially) to do more complex and useful things like > using multiple `:has()` (including nested ones) in the same selector: > > .example:has(nav a:has(> img) + div:has(span)) > > So we can have multiple `:has()` subselectors while we cannot have > multiple subject selectors (and even if we did, that most likely would not > be as readable / intuitive / straightforward as `:has()` is). > > According to selectors L4 you can have multiple ! (bangs). http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors4/#subject See what it means there -- you can also pair ! with :matches to achieve what you can with :has in theory. To be clear, I am *strongly* for :has, but I want to make sure that people have all of the information to cast a vote. -- Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com
Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 21:21:00 UTC