Re: Behavior of matches() and closest() with :scope()

On 9/2/14, 12:42 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> For the same reason that :scope matches the element in .matches().

Ok, but why does it do that?  Are there situations in which this is 
actually useful for something?

> Anything you might want to pass to .matches(), you might want to pass
> to .closest().

Sure.

> #1 would allow you to write a .closest() selector which, paired with
> :has(), can explicitly reference the starting element,

Right.  Are there equally compelling use cases for the other option?

> but you can
> reproduce that if necessary by adding a uniquifier to the starting
> element and matching on that.

That's a super-gross (and super-slow!) hack.  I'd rather not force 
people into it unless required.

-Boris