> On Aug 3, 2017, at 4:35 PM, Gautam Sathe <gautamsa...@justdial.com> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 02 August 2017 08:54 PM, Eric A. Meyer wrote:
>> I confess to being a little bit confused here, because I read this as you
>> asking about a 'td' that's a child of another 'td' and I don't think that's
>> a thing. Could you provide some markup samples to illustrate cases where
>> you do and don't want selection to occur?
So am I :-). The one possibility that I could think of is a `td` **descendant**
of another `td` - aka nested tables.
> I believe what Felix meant is this:
>
> He wants all td's that are nth child (2) i.e. the second TD of each TR to be
> subjected to a particular rule EXCEPT if they also have a colspan.
>
> i.e if a second TD has a colspan the rule should not apply.
>
> I could have misunderstood his requirement of course - in which case the code
> I sent last time would also be invalid.
That one is easy.
td:not([colspan]):nth-child(2) { background: lime; }
You could make the range narrower, e.g. td:not([colspan=2]):nth-child(2) {}
Philippe
--
Philippe Wittenbergh
https://l-c-n.com/
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
