> what you are missing is mootools allows you to implement your custom > selector.
It's not a custom selector. Sure, the facility exists for users to create their own, and it was originally submitted as an extension, but this now ships in the Selectors package. No great mystery why it's there: it was added because it was in a draft spec for CSS 3. The expectation was that browsers' native CSS parsers would achieve parity, so it _could_ be used in a stylesheet eventually. Then it was taken out of the spec, but had to be left in Selectors for BC in Moo-land. It was redundant in the spec anyway, now it's worse because it's both non-standard (so it doesn't serve any forward compatibility function) *and* redundant. Don't you think the prevalence of "DHTML" rollovers helped MS put off full support for :hover in IE? And I *still* don't see major IDEs using that pseudo, instead spitting out unnecessary script. I feel this is the same area. Any time you make yourself rely on script-only behaviors that have easy CSS counterparts, you are inhibiting the adoption and field-testing of CSS techniques. Compounding the prob is when it's script-only, but looks like standard CSS. It should at least start with '-moo-' (like '-moz-'). -- Sandy
