- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 05:18:53 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > On Mar 14, 2008, at 1:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > > > > I think ability to do element-rooted selector queries (either > > > through a new method or a :scope pseudo-element) is more important, > > > since it's needed to replicate the feature set of JS query > > > libraries. > > > > If we could get a :scope pseudo-element that would be an excellent > > solution IMHO, and would be great with scoped stylesheets as has been > > pointed out elsewhere in the last few days. > > > > Is that something that should be defined by this WG? It would suck to > > have to wait for Level 4 Selectors. Other WGs have defined selectors, > > but I'm not sure how good of an idea that is. > > I would prefer to see it in the Selectors spec, but it would have to > come out of CR for that. Perhaps the editor of the Selectors spec > (Hixie) would like to weigh in. Alternately, we could temporarily define > the pseudo-element in the Selectors API spec. (It would be a pseudo-class, not a pseudo-element.) The :matches() proposal uses "#" for the concept of "context node". XBL2 uses :bound-element for a similar concept. I don't think this feature is critical to the selectors API. I would recommend going ahead with the API as it is now, and moving this extension to a second version, or possibly to the next version of the Selectors spec. I think it would be a good idea for someone to start working on the next Selectors spec anyway, to spec out :matches(), the DOM attributes stuff ([#textContent*='...'], [#col=4], [#row<2], etc), this, and the various other new ideas that have been suggested since Selectors last had new features suggested. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 15 March 2008 05:45:59 UTC