@abritinthebay Any suggestion for the syntax? I'd be okay with adding the feature
-
-
Replying to @GregWildSmith
@abritinthebay Let's CC
@tabatkins, he should have good input1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @awfulben
@awfulben@tabatkins cool :) More input is always good!1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GregWildSmith
@abritinthebay
@tabatkins is the editor of the new Selector spec. This problem may have been discussed before.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @awfulben
@awfulben@tabatkins I'm pretty sure it has. I know there is a resistance to doing backward lookups (for performance I guess).2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GregWildSmith
@abritinthebay In the last spec, we do backward lookup for :nth-last-child(an+b of selector). It already works in WebKit.
@tabatkins1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @awfulben
@awfulben Hmm great point. Yeah, then I don't really see a good argument against a full siblings selector... (just inertia)@tabatkins1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GregWildSmith
@abritinthebay
@awfulben Yeah, per previous talk with@bz_moz , it's really just the "ancestor" selector that's too slow. Parent/sib is ok.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tabatkins
@tabatkins @abritinthebay@bz_moz What do you think about moving :has() with "+" and "~" in the fast profile?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@awfulben @tabatkins @abritinthebay My gut feeling is that it might be ok, but I'd want to try implementing first to make sure....
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.