- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:50:51 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 22/07/2015 10:05, Benjamin Poulain wrote: > Can you please give some context? I only joined this group last year. > This is the first time I hear someone taking the subject selector > seriously. Sure. The subject selector is something I introduced myself back in 1998 in a CSS-like language called STTS; STTS standing for Simple Tree Transformation Sheets, I guess you understand easily what it was about. At that time, the selector was called the "selected element selector" and its first iteration was a :selected() functional pseudo-class (no flames please :-) ) specifying, in a selector, the subject of the selector. I eventually moved from that pseudo to a very easy to understand ! descriptor and called it the subject selector. Trivial examples: div > p matches all p directly inside a div !div > p matches all div directly containing a p In terms of implementation, it changes nothing to the "match selectors from the deepest condition to the upmost one", but it potentially defers the application of the selector to a subsequent climb in the tree. I understand it impacts the implementation and requires some changes. I implemented it in a batch processor handling STTS. In terms of usage, this was far less powerful than :has(). But it was also far simpler to use and read, and most certainly easier to implement. From a Web author's perspective, it covered most of the cases needed _at that time_. I still think it would be a superb addition to Selectors, probably highly welcomed by our users. Is that enough context? </Daniel>
Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2015 08:51:23 UTC