- From: Clive Chan <doobahead@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:30:02 +0000
- To: www-style@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2015 09:50:11 UTC
The existence of the following-sibling combinator, +, begs the question: why doesn't a previous-sibling combinator exist? I can't imagine that it's any harder to implement, and I can't come up with any semantic objection - in fact, the lack of symmetry would be a semantic argument for it. If the above seems at all reasonable, the symbol "-" would make sense for the job. Clive Chan
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2015 09:50:11 UTC