davatron5000
Selectors
The reason I ultimately gave up on mine was that selectors are way harder to remove than properties and values. Ultimately it would be cool if this could negate selectors...
li:nth-last-child(2) {
font-weight: bold;
}
so I guess it would find that, and either somehow remove it or go through each property and negate it:
li:nth-last-child(2) {
font-weight: normal;
}
/(.*?)\:nth-last-child\(\d\)\s*\{.*\}/ig or something similar would create the match, and then I could just remove the entire rule.
Here's a list of all the selectors by CSS version http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#selectors
Quite a bit of regex going on... but I think we tackle each selector one by one. I'll maybe work on those this evening.
It may actually be easier than all that. Since we are going through, rule by rule, we could naiively do something like this:
if ( rule.match(/\:nth-last-child/g) ) {
newRule = "";
}
BUT i think when you go through the rules that have multiple selectors, one of which is valid, another which isn't, it gets hairier.
li:nth-last-child(2),
li.last {
border: bold;
}
So maybe we keep the rule but turn the pseudo selector into something nonsensical, but valid:
rule.replace( /\:nth-last-child\(\d+\)/g, '.supermegafarts' );
li.supermegafarts,
li.last {
border: bold;
}
Important fact: if part of a selector is invalid, the whole thing becomes invalid.
li:nth-last-child(2),
strong {
color: red;
}
In a browser that doesn't support :nth-list-child, strongs will NOT be red. That's a fact for every browser in the world that I know of, except IE 7. So not sure what the best plan would be there. But overall I think this becomes easier.
oh, hmm. that actually might end up being harder now that i look at the code. :/ I'll see what I can do.
OH EASY
Just replace the rule with something invalid! Then IE (if we supported it...) would technically have the right behavior, etc.
li:nth-last-child(2),
strong {
color: red;
}
becomes
INVALIDSELECTOR:INVALID,
strong {
color: red;
}