- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:30:17 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>, Francois Remy <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net
> <mailto:brkemper@comcast.net>> wrote:
>
>
> Consider the following:
>
> div:with-child(code) { border:2px solid #999;
> background-color:beige; }
> div:with-child(code):before { content:"See Code:"; }
>
> I would only want this on DIVs that surrounded the Code block
> directly, not on any old DIV that happened to be an ancestor of
> the code block.
>
>
> Nod, searching for just children would certainly be useful. That's
> why my proposal was for a simple selector preceded by a combinator.
> You'd do this:
>
> div:matches( > code ) { border:2px solid #999; background-color:beige; }
> div:matches( > code ):before { content:"See Code:"; }
That is again subject of :root/:scope debate :)
>
> I can really see no use case for a "has-child" pseudo-class to
> look at all descendants.
>
>
> Really? I can. I probably wouldn't ever want to use a plain
> descendant selector on something like a plain div, but I could easily
> see this being used on a more complex element about which you have a
> greater knowledge of it's use. Frex:
As a solution: http://www.terrainformatica.com/?p=100
Cheers.
--
Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Friday, 25 July 2008 21:31:11 UTC