I think we are not seeing thing the same manner,
IMO, the selector concept in js is beyond css,
I can perfectly do this,
Selector.Pseudo.foo = function () {
return this.childNodes.length > 3
}
element.getElement(':foo'),
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Sanford Whiteman <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > 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
>
>
>
--
http://tbela99.blogspot.com/
fax : (+33) 08 26 51 94 51
