On 2/22/10 6:08 AM, Dean Edwards wrote:
Yes, I'm suggesting redefining how :empty works. For elements that cannot have children
There is no such thing in XML.
it could mean having no content. e.g. An<input> with no value or an<img> with no src.
So this would need to be defined on the document language level, not in CSS. Sounds to me like you actually want a new psuedo-class with about your description the matching of which CSS would defer to the document language.
There is a small chance that it could break some pages I guess.
So why is it worth it, then?
I always wanted a pseudo-class that could match<input> with no value. Extending :empty is probably a bad idea but something like :no-value would be useful.
I'd be fine with :no-value, I think, though it could easily be misused due to unexpected situations when it happens (e.g. a text input that I'm typing in and delete all the text but am about to type more text is :no-value, right?).
-Boris
