On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Cameron McCormack wrote: > > The list of valid pseudo-elements seems very arbitrary and widget > oriented.
Yes. > XBL 2 is not only going to be used for widgets. The feature seems like > a great way to expose abstractions of the shadow tree for styling by > users of the binding, but to be even more useful I think arbitrary > psuedo-element names should be allowed. A binding for bar charts could > then expose a pseudo-element called series1, series2, etc., so that > individual data series could be coloured using CSS. I don't disagree, but that's a CSS issue. I recommend raising this with the CSS working group. > The valid pseudo-elements are “value”, “choices”, “label”, > “repeat-item”, and “icon”. Future versions of CSS might introduce new > values. > > Is that meant to say “Future versions of XBL”? No, CSS defines pseudos. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
