- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:13:56 -0700
- To: lists@novalistic.com
- Cc: "<www-style@w3.org>" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Daniel Tan <lists@novalistic.com> wrote: > On the surface, it seems fairly trivial to extend pseudo-classes that take > An+B expressions such that they allow multiple expressions in a single > pseudo-class. This could be very handy for targeting many specific children > in a way that cannot be easily written in a single, or few, expressions: > > td:nth-of-type(1, 3, 7, 10) > > Admittedly, this feature would be used almost exclusively with integers > rather than entire An+B expressions, but actively restricting the > microsyntax in lists seems pointless. > > There is :matches(), but it requires having to repeat the pseudo-class which > is not ideal: > > td:matches( > :nth-of-type(1), :nth-of-type(3), > :nth-of-type(7), :nth-of-type(10) > ) > > This isn't nearly as popular as :matches(), :has(), or :nth-child(An+B of > sel), but it does come up fairly often. That said I'm curious to know what > it would take to implement (and justify implementing) such a feature. There's nothing wrong with that at a parsing level. The more complex grammar of :nth-child() is a bit more difficult, though - comma-separated indexes, or whole entries? ~TJ
Received on Monday, 22 June 2015 18:14:43 UTC