Re: [selectors] Need to clearly define matching for :first-child, :nth-*, etc from Daniel Glazman on 2015-07-15 (www-style@w3.org from July 2015)

From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 21:09:33 +0200
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <55A6AFED.5050305@disruptive-innovations.com>

On 15/07/2015 21:00, Boris Zbarsky wrote:

>> (But seriously, what are people misinterpreting this as? Do they think
>> :first-child shouldn't match an element without a parent?
> 
> Yes, exactly.  Or more interesting, :nth-child(1).

:first-child was _designed_ not to match an element without a parent.

:first-child() is explicitely defined in Selectors 3 section
6.6.5.6 as the "same as :nth-child(1) so it should match on an element
without a parent either.

</Daniel>

Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2015 19:10:06 UTC