Sean Hogan wrote:
In summary, the proposed :scope pseudo-class only acts as a scope for
the query in special cases, not in the general case.
Yes, I'm aware of that. That was basically my reasoning for attempting
to change it to :reference, but that name wasn't particularly well
received either. However, keep in mind, I'd prefer to avoid having this
turn into another naming debate. Selectors API has suffered enough in
the past as a result of that.
So if you have anything more to add, I'd request that you check the
archives for this list and www-style for messages relating to
:scope/:reference/:context, etc. to see what arguments have been raised
previously.
The most recent discussion of and objections to :reference are in this
thread from www-style last September. There were also other objections
raised with me on IRC and told to me directly.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Sep/thread.html#msg251
In particular, this one lists most of the alternatives have been
considered, and it also sums up why the selector pre-processing for
scoped selectors got watered down to its current state.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Sep/0317.html
--
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
