W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2015

Re: [selectors] Need to clearly define matching for :first-child, :nth-*, etc

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 11:28:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAk7+_LdZ2wbtmX-cn_3yS=zkJX6wEwV9AarSMDq+nLSA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> There is some confusion about how things should work when an element has no
> parent and hence no concept of siblings.
> The language in the spec is vague enough that different people are
> interpreting it different ways.  It would be good to clarify things here by
> explicitly defining the sibling list of an element for purposes of this
> stuff or something; right now there is no definition that I can find.

There's no explicit definition because I didn't realize there could be
any possible confusion. We already have the + combinator, which relies
on the exact same concept.  How are people interpreting these
differently, and what needs clarification, exactly?

Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2015 18:29:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:52:18 UTC