- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 10:43:21 -0800
- To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> wrote: > On 27.2.2014 17:53, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> Again, the inconsistency is internal. "*", when used in type >> selectors, is just a wildcard tagname. It acts identically wrt >> namespaces as a real tagname does. "*", when used in ::attr(), should >> work the same, and be identical to a real attribute name wrt >> namespaces. >> >> Your suggestion is that "*" act *differently* than a normal attribute >> name, so that it assumes "all namespaces" while a normal attribute >> names assumes "the null namespace". > > But as there is already inconsistency between type selectors ("E" > selects E elements in any namespace) and attribute selectors ("[A]" > matches elements that have A attribute in no namespace) I don't think > that special treatment of "*" as wildcard in ::attr(*) will do any harm. > After all this behaviour can be brought back to attribute selectors -- > "[*]" will match element that has at least one attribute. > Is there any option to have selectors on attribute names (partial matches) too rather than on their values? I saw practical need for for something like: E[data-*] { ... } that will match any E element with any "data-something" attribute. Same apply to that ::attr() construct if it will go through. -- Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2014 18:43:49 UTC