I have some css like so…
[data-tags~="video"] #organizationid,
[data-tags~="video"] #allianceid,
[data-tags~="video"] #sourceid,
[data-tags~="video"] #placeid
{
display: block;
}
Is there a way to group the IDs so I do not need to repeat custom data-tag definition text?
Thanks
You can use the :is() CSS pseudo class function:
Thank you. Initial changes are working as expected.
@saqimtiaz sorry, in the end it was not working. Likely how I’m using it.
:is ([data-tags~="video"]) #organizationid, #allianceid, #sourceid, #placeid { display: block }
What is wrong?
Try this:
[data-tags~="video"] :is(#organizationid, #allianceid, #sourceid, #placeid)
{
display: block;
}
Again, thank you!!! Much appreciated.
@clsturgeon
The solution you have is a good one, however, for your own (or your code’s) well-being you should be aware of what :is() is doing to specificity. Read the following comparison between :is() and :where() and be sure for yourself that :is() is what you actually want/need.
@CodaCoder I suspect :is() is the correct choice. Here is the use case so you can better comment.
I have been using these css custom style data-tags to define which edit fields appear in my edit template.
All my controls for these fields have a class that defines {display:none} and these data-tags in css explicitly change those to {display:block}
These controls appear in tiddler edit mode, providing a complete list of editable fields defined for a specific tag.
In the limited example I previously provided I showed a few fields that would appear if the tiddler being edited was tagged with “video”.
When used the syntax @saqimtiaz provided it appears to be functional/working.
Also, I suspect this approach would be processed more efficiently than the way I had it.
Thoughts?